Marketplace trust

[OgNasty]

You want to talk about "misquotes" then how about those NastyMining shares you claim I offered you?  

I'm embarrassed for you Vod.  Your behavior since the initial lies and abuse has highlighted your insecurity.  It makes perfect sense now why you run a site trying to rank members here, where you continually adjust some made up recognition formula to keep yourself rated #2.  It's honestly sad.  

Vod, you are a liar. No amount of word twisting will change that. Claiming you’ve been misquoted is a lie as every quote I posted from you is 100% authentic. Nobody believes you anymore and you continuing to push your lies is both pathetic and sad. I guess you’re trying to appear so pitiful that you get sympathy or something? Grow up... You fucked up. Admit it, apologize, and move on.

[1714901559]

1714901559

[1714901559]

1714901559

[1714901559]

1714901559

[Vod]

Vod, you are a liar. No amount of word twisting will change that.

Of course, myself and many others can pull dozens of examples of you lying and misquoting.

You and Techy can't produce anything other than your opinions I may have taken something out of context.

Each time I post another valid lie with simple proof, you change the subject.  :/

Your one example is really weak, as you assume I wasn’t responding to a request for merit

That assumption was correct, so his example is a strong one showing you misquoted me to make yourself look better.  If you had any PMs of my asking you for merit other than when you offered, you would have posted them when your rep started to slide.  :/

[TECSHARE]

You and Techy can't produce anything other than your opinions I may have taken something out of context.

Here is page after page after page after page of you doing your mentally ill clown dance to try to cover up for your inability to substantiate your lies and abuse of the trust system. I am not sure how I can take your own words out of context.

[Vod]

^ ^ ^ I like the use of Trump as you spread mistruth.   

[TECSHARE]

^ ^ ^ I like the use of Trump as you spread mistruth.   

I am letting your own words speak for you Vod. There are pages upon pages of you desperately struggling to avoid substantiating your accusations in a pathetic attempt to avoid responsibility for your abusive behavior.

[Vod]

I am letting your own words speak for you Vod. There are pages upon pages of you desperately struggling to avoid substantiating your accusations in a pathetic attempt to avoid responsibility for your abusive behavior.

Ok, where did I say I'm abusive?  How many pages did I say it in? Can you show me my own words, or just add a lot of filler?

[TECSHARE]

I am letting your own words speak for you Vod. There are pages upon pages of you desperately struggling to avoid substantiating your accusations in a pathetic attempt to avoid responsibility for your abusive behavior.

Ok, where did I say I'm abusive?  How many pages did I say it in? Can you show me my own words, or just add a lot of filler?

Is this what you call being clever Vod? You abused the trust system. You claim I "lied about" you, but after dozens of pages of people asking you to substantiate that claim you were simply unable to. You were forced to remove your rating after former staff Badbear removed you from his trust list over it. This is your favorite tactic, accusing your opponent of what you are guilty of and mimicking their words in a constant desperate effort to create low grade confusion and distraction from the real damning evidence of your own misbehavior. You are like a small retarded child stealing cookies, and when you ask them "hey did you steal those cookies?" they reply in a desperate and transparent attempt to hide their crimes "NO YOU STOLE THE COOKIES!"

[Vod]

I am letting your own words speak for you Vod. There are pages upon pages of you desperately struggling to avoid substantiating your accusations in a pathetic attempt to avoid responsibility for your abusive behavior.

Ok, where did I say I'm abusive?  How many pages did I say it in? Can you show me my own words, or just add a lot of filler?

Is this what you call being clever Vod? You abused the trust system. You claim I "lied about" you, but after dozens of pages of people asking you to substantiate that claim you were simply unable to. You were forced to remove your rating after former staff Badbear removed you from his trust list over it. This is your favorite tactic, accusing your opponent of what you are guilty of and mimicking their words in a constant desperate effort to create low grade confusion and distraction from the real damning evidence of your own misbehavior. You are like a small retarded child stealing cookies, and when you ask them "hey did you steal those cookies?" they reply in a desperate and transparent attempt to hide their crimes "NO YOU STOLE THE COOKIES!"

I abused the trust system?    unsubstantiated
I was unable to verify you were a liar?  unsubstantiated
I was forced to remove a rating?  unsubstantiated
I am trying to confuse and distract?   unsubstantiated
etc
etc

Tell us more, Mr. encyclopedia. 

[TECSHARE]

I abused the trust system?    unsubstantiated
I was unable to verify you were a liar?  unsubstantiated
I was forced to remove a rating?  unsubstantiated
I am trying to confuse and distract?   unsubstantiated
etc
etc

Tell us more, Mr. encyclopedia. 

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

Your argument now is that I didn't substantiate, that you didn't substantiate your claims? Do you put your brain into a blender every morning to get this kind of flawless logic? My lies can be substantiated right now! All you have to do is quote what I lied about in your original rating. Prove me wrong. In this case, proving a negative is not possible, and this is the only way you can "win" an argument is by setting an impossible standard. You enjoy your semantic gymnastics though and pretend what you are saying makes any sense if you like. Anyone with basic abilities for simple logic can see what you are doing here.

Your mentally ill clown dance of distraction and confusion is evident to see for anyone who bothers to read this thread where you spend about a dozen pages in a desperate attempt to distract from your inability to substantiate your claims.

[bones261]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

I don't see that Vod has been excluded from the trust system by staff. I find that staff members Cyrus, Welsh and HostFat have included him and no staff members have excluded him. Are your confusing the trust system with the merit system? I do believe Vod was removed as a merit source. 

[TECSHARE]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

I don't see that Vod has been excluded from the trust system by staff. I find that staff members Cyrus, Welsh and HostFat have included him and no staff members have excluded him. Are your confusing the trust system with the merit system? I do believe Vod was removed as a merit source. 

The lack of action here by the staff is clear evidence of his protected position regardless of how much he abuses the trust system.

Tecshare, Badbear removed me from his trust list.  I do not have a protected position on default trust.  Stop lying about me.

I'll go add the reference to the trust now and put this to rest. 

Badbear was a moderator at the time. Moderation is a paid position. Paid position = staff.

[Vod]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result.

unsubstantiated.  I don't need to waste any extra time debating you when you type clear lies like this.

[TECSHARE]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result.

unsubstantiated.  I don't need to waste any extra time debating you when you type clear lies like this.

Its cute how you do your semantic gymnastics here to not only call me a liar when the words came right from you, but then also use it as an opportunity to make it seem as if you are some how substantiating your original claims of lies that you abused the trust system over originally. Bravo for packing the maximal amount of horse shit into such a small package. You are used to small packages aren't you? After all, that would explain a lot of your behavior.

[Vod]

you abused the trust system over originally.

Again, no substantiated evidence.  

[mikeywith]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

I don't know about that particular staff and vod's story and i don't care, but the quoted statement of yours is wrong, just because a staff thinks something it does not mean it is the ultimate unquestionable proof of anything, some staff here are excluded terribly from DT and their judgment sucks.

Also reading your signature and how you describe staff and then using the same group of people as a reference of honesty and accuracy is funny, which one is correct ? Your signature or the quoted part?

I know it is hard for you to do so, but i hope you would remain calm and don't bring up that attitude on me , just answer the question 

[TECSHARE]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

I don't know about that particular staff and vod's story and i don't care, but the quoted statement of yours is wrong, just because a staff thinks something it does not mean it is the ultimate unquestionable proof of anything, some staff here are excluded terribly from DT and their judgment sucks.

Also reading your signature and how you describe staff and then using the same group of people as a reference of honesty and accuracy is funny, which one is correct ? Your signature or the quoted part?

I know it is hard for you to do so, but i hope you would remain calm and don't bring up that attitude on me , just answer the question 

Yeah why would you care to inform yourself about a subject when you can be totally ignorant and have a strong opinion about it anyway, Mr. I just had my 1 year anniversary here? I never said anything about "ultimate unquestionable proof of anything". At the time BadBear was basically Theymos's right hand man and was pretty much the main moderator. That is not the case any longer, but you were not around for any of this anyway so what the fuck do you know? If you really care about my signature you can read more here, but clearly you are just here to brown nose and play little games. If you don't like my attitude maybe you should check your own.

[Vod]

At the time BadBear was basically Theymos's right hand man and was pretty much the main moderator.

You should back up these claims with substantial information.  

Also reading your signature and how you describe staff and then using the same group of people as a reference of honesty and accuracy is funny, which one is correct ? Your signature or the quoted part?

I know it is hard for you to do so, but i hope you would remain calm and don't bring up that attitude on me , just answer the question  

Mr. I just had my 1 year anniversary here?

He had a perfectly valid question which you, of course, ignored and changed the subject.  

[OgNasty]

You should back up these claims with substantial information.  

Like when you claimed I offered you NastyMining shares? Guess we’ll never see anything backing that up since you are nothing more than a liar huh?

[mikeywith]

Mr. I just had my 1 year anniversary here?

This Mr. Has more merit than couple hundreds of legendary members combined, a DT member and most importantly has no enemies on forum and has been always helpful and constructive aside from sometime enjoying the drama on Meta as everyone here does  

But all of the above is irrevlent to the subject in hand, one does not need a master degree  in Bitcointalk to know bullshit when they see it.

Simple logic states that at least one of the statements you stated are wrong, you reffered to staff action as a "very solid substantiation" , but in your signature you reffer to their action as the total opposite, now there are only three possibilities.

1- your claim about the staff action  removing Vod as " substantiation" is wrong

2-your claim about the staff in your signature is wrong

3-both claims are wrong.

You can't be "selective" in describing someone's action, they are either accurate or not.

So pick one of the above / answer the question, or go for a more convenient option which is  "attacking" me.

[TECSHARE]

Well staff agreed you were abusing the trust system and excluded you as a result. I would say that is pretty solid substantiation.

I don't know about that particular staff and vod's story and i don't care, but the quoted statement of yours is wrong, just because a staff thinks something it does not mean it is the ultimate unquestionable proof of anything, some staff here are excluded terribly from DT and their judgment sucks.

Also reading your signature and how you describe staff and then using the same group of people as a reference of honesty and accuracy is funny, which one is correct ? Your signature or the quoted part?

I know it is hard for you to do so, but i hope you would remain calm and don't bring up that attitude on me , just answer the question 

Yeah why would you care to inform yourself about a subject when you can be totally ignorant and have a strong opinion about it anyway, Mr. I just had my 1 year anniversary here? I never said anything about "ultimate unquestionable proof of anything". At the time BadBear was basically Theymos's right hand man and was pretty much the main moderator. That is not the case any longer, but you were not around for any of this anyway so what the fuck do you know? If you really care about my signature you can read more here, but clearly you are just here to brown nose and play little games. If you don't like my attitude maybe you should check your own.

This Mr. Has more merit than couple hundreds of legendary members combined, a DT member and most importantly has no enemies on forum and has been always helpful and constructive aside from sometime enjoying the drama on Meta as everyone here does 

But all of the above is irrevlent to the subject in hand, one does not need a master degree  in Bitcointalk to know bullshit when they see it.

Simple logic states that at least one of the statements you stated are wrong, you reffered to staff action as a "very solid substantiation" , but in your signature you reffer to their action as the total opposite, now there are only three possibilities.

1- your claim about the staff action  removing Vod as " substantiation" is wrong

2-your claim about the staff in your signature is wrong

3-both claims are wrong.

You can't be "selective" in describing someone's action, they are either accurate or not.

So pick one of the above / answer the question, or go for a more convenient option which is  "attacking" me.

Ooo, merit. Very impressive. The above is VERY relevant, because you just showed up within the last year, and as a result you were not around to witness previous happenings, therefore your conclusions are based on limited information. You even explicitly said "I don't know about that particular staff and vod's story and i don't care", so you are not only poorly informed, you are willfully ignorant based on your own statements.

The premise you are presenting is a logical fallacy called a false choice.

1. Badbear was staff. Badbear removed Vod from his trust list. Vod was removed from his trust list as a direct result of his abusive behavior. A staff member agreed his behavior was abusive.

2. This is not an all or nothing premise. The staff can exercise selective enforcement and also make credible choices simultaneously, they are not exclusive concepts. Furthermore there is more than one member of the staff.

3. See 1 & 2.