Negative trust with no reason

[Boseda]

The user "Vod" gave me a negative trust with no reason.

How can I change my trust summary?

[1714814060]

1714814060

[1714814060]

1714814060

[1714814060]

1714814060

[Quickseller]

Contact dooglus, Cyrus and HostFat about your concerns about the rating that Vod left you.

[suchmoon]

The user "Vod" gave me a negative trust with no reason.

How can I change my trust summary?

Talk to the user "Vod".

But first you should stop lying about there being "no reason". The reason is clearly stated in your trust feedback:

Wrote a keylogger virus.

Reference link:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1769689

Whether you like it or not - that's a different story, but you should not waste your and Vod's time with the "no reason" argument.

[jackg]

The user "Vod" gave me a negative trust with no reason.

How can I change my trust summary?

Talk to the user "Vod".

But first you should stop lying about there being "no reason". The reason is clearly stated in your trust feedback:

Wrote a keylogger virus.

Reference link:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1769689

Whether you like it or not - that's a different story, but you should not waste your and Vod's time with the "no reason" argument.

Speaking to Vod isn't going to do anything but increase spam in his inbox.
If that is true then the trustis definitely valid and could mean you get more negative trust as a result of this.

EDIT:
I checked the reference and the trust does seem quite valid. You coded a keylogger and in doing so help scams to take place, therefore, you're not much of a positive asset to this forum.

[suchmoon]

Speaking to Vod isn't going to do anything but increase spam in his inbox.
If that is true then the trustis definitely valid and could mean you get more negative trust as a result of this.

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not. Speaking to Vod might help if the OP is willing to stop the activities that triggered the neg trust. In any case, it's between the OP and Vod just like any other trust issue.

[Vod]

The user "Vod" gave me a negative trust with no reason.

Lying about "no reason" shows you show no remorse for your actions.   

[Lauda]

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'? 

[Vod]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

[jackg]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Hahaha, the other three (words) still stand, that's good!

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'? 

Apparently not. OP appears to only help scammers to scam not scam himself (a very weird ideology)

[Quickseller]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Hahaha, the other three (words) still stand, that's good!

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'?[ 

Apparently not. OP appears to only help scammers to scam not scam himself (a very weird ideology)

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

[jackg]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Hahaha, the other three (words) still stand, that's good!

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'?[ 

Apparently not. OP appears to only help scammers to scam not scam himself (a very weird ideology)

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

The ponzi debate is definitely a strange one. Even the more honest can still end up taking your money because they eventually end so it's best just to stay away from them altogether.
What do you mean the situations are identical? This and that one are identical or are you referencing something else that I've missed?

[Vod]

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

Oh Quickseller, I don't think you want to start calling other people hypocrites.   

[Quickseller]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Hahaha, the other three (words) still stand, that's good!

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'?[ 

Apparently not. OP appears to only help scammers to scam not scam himself (a very weird ideology)

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

The ponzi debate is definitely a strange one. Even the more honest can still end up taking your money because they eventually end so it's best just to stay away from them altogether.
What do you mean the situations are identical? This and that one are identical or are you referencing something else that I've missed?

The OP wrote a program that can be used to steal passwords and other similar sensitive information.
Dooglus wrote/fixed a program that is designed to steal money from others.

The OP received a negative rating from Vod, Dooglus did not....hypocrite much?

[jackg]

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

Oh Quickseller, I don't think you want to start calling other people hypocrites.  

Evidence of him being a hypocrite? He used alt accounts to manipulate his trust but did he say he was against the use of alts catagorically?

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Hahaha, the other three (words) still stand, that's good!

Distributing software that is solely intended for malicious purposes is considered 'no reason'?[  

Apparently not. OP appears to only help scammers to scam not scam himself (a very weird ideology)

It appears that some people are selective about who they leave negative trust against, even when both situations are nearly identical

The ponzi debate is definitely a strange one. Even the more honest can still end up taking your money because they eventually end so it's best just to stay away from them altogether.
What do you mean the situations are identical? This and that one are identical or are you referencing something else that I've missed?

The OP wrote a program that can be used to steal passwords and other similar sensitive information.
Dooglus wrote/fixed a program that is designed to steal money from others.

The OP received a negative rating from Vod, Dooglus did not....hypocrite much?

That is quite strange though - but he is detecting scams now.

[Quickseller]

[...]
What do you mean the situations are identical? This and that one are identical or are you referencing something else that I've missed?

The OP wrote a program that can be used to steal passwords and other similar sensitive information.
Dooglus wrote/fixed a program that is designed to steal money from others.

The OP received a negative rating from Vod, Dooglus did not....hypocrite much?

That is quite strange though - but he is detecting scams now.

I am not sure what you mean by this? I see that dooglus has given negative trust to a small number of ponzi operators, which would imply that running a ponzi = scamming in his eyes. Or are you talking about Vod...if so, then it seems that Vod only selectively leaves negative trust when doing so will not jeopardize his power.

[jackg]

[...]
What do you mean the situations are identical? This and that one are identical or are you referencing something else that I've missed?

The OP wrote a program that can be used to steal passwords and other similar sensitive information.
Dooglus wrote/fixed a program that is designed to steal money from others.

The OP received a negative rating from Vod, Dooglus did not....hypocrite much?

That is quite strange though - but he is detecting scams now.

I am not sure what you mean by this? I see that dooglus has given negative trust to a small number of ponzi operators, which would imply that running a ponzi = scamming in his eyes. Or are you talking about Vod...if so, then it seems that Vod only selectively leaves negative trust when doing so will not jeopardize his power.

Both would be true.
I don't think VOD would want to lose his DT2 status on this forum. In both ways: 1. He feels he is helping the community and wants to keep it to warn other people about problems with users; or 2. He wants to keep the DT2 status to be more powerful.
You can't really do anything to jeopardize your power from this point - whereas vod will have quite a lot to lose if he jeopardizes his account.
But if dooglas is going to mark up ponzi scheme, he maybe shouldn't have started negging them before that point (unless you apply different ethics to ponzis that function "honestly" - but still lose money and could still disappear at any point).

[Vod]

then it seems that Vod only selectively leaves negative trust when doing so will not jeopardize his power.

That's an incredibly naive statement.  I am not able to investigate everything that goes on here.  I don't leave negative feedback for thousands of potential scams, because I simply don't have time, and I'm not being paid to do so.

I could simply dig up a time you left feedback for a newbie asking for a no collateral loan, then dig up an account where you didn't.  You are doing the exact same thing as me, leaving selective feedback.

[Boseda]

The user "Vod" gave me a negative trust with no reason.

Lying about "no reason" shows you show no remorse for your actions.   

I say "no reason" because:

- I did not steal money
- I did not scam people
- I did not blackmail people or similar...
- In general, I did nothing illegal


Thus your negative feedback is just absurd and should be punished by someone...

[sbogovac]

I think there is some dispute whether the keylogger is actually a virus or not.

I removed the "virus" part of the feedback.

Sorry Vod, but I have to ask (after reading https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1769689 too): what is wrong with someone writing a keylogger?

There are plenty of normal/legal uses for a keylogger (I have them installed f.i. on all my employee's company computers and they actually sign for it).

It's like saying "BTC is illegal/wrong"... I honestly don't understand why you gave a negative trust rating because of that... 

[Lauda]

- In general, I did nothing illegal

The trust system isn't based on illegal or legal actions though.

Thus your negative feedback is just absurd and should be punished by someone...

That is your opinion. If Vod doesn't trust you for faciliating software that is generally used for malicious purposes, then it is his choice whether to leave you feedback or not. Obviously, whilst in DT a user can't leave such ratings randomly.

There are plenty of normal/legal uses for a keylogger (I have them installed f.i. on all my employee's company computers and they actually sign for it).

We all know that this one won't be used for legal purposes. There's no need to play the devil's advocate.