Misuse of DT power

[ubitcoin]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

I remember the conventions followed here : for scam -> negative trust and for spamming -> banning

Why Lauda should be guided to be sticking within those conventions ?

[1714022821]

1714022821

[actmyname]

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.Who said you needed an open scam accusation?

[ubitcoin]

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Thank you for agreeing that negative trust is only for SCAM.

Account selling/ account farming are related to POTENTIAL-spamming, not scamming.
Account selling/ account farming are in no way related to SCAM until there will be a connection of known alts and one of alts is involving in scam, right ?

Who said you needed an open scam accusation?

How you will come to know unless otherwise someone is claiming ?

[actmyname]

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

Thank you for agreeing that negative trust is only for SCAM.

Account selling/ account farming are related to POTENTIAL-spamming, not scamming.
Account selling/ account farming are in no way related to SCAM until there will be a connection of known alts and one of alts is involving in scam, right ?

I distrust someone for x reason. I believe they are a scammer or are perpetuating scams, which I consider the same thing. Enabling scams is just as bad as scamming itself.

Who said you needed an open scam accusation?

How you will come to know unless otherwise someone is claiming ?

Do we need open scam accusations for tagging ponzis? You don't have to go out of your way to create a thread or get someone else to make one unless you need the community to deal with it.

[Vod]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

There is no open scam accusation against Lauda - why did you give negative feedback to him?

[Quickseller]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

There is no open scam accusation against Lauda - why did you give negative feedback to him?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

^^yes there is. It is above.

[Vod]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

There is no open scam accusation against Lauda - why did you give negative feedback to him?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

^^yes there is. It is above.

The community has decided that was a false accusation.

The only person still pursuing it is you - a person the community has determined to be a scammer.

Your disruptive/misleading actions would not be tolerated in a court of law, nor will they be tolerated here. 

[ubitcoin]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

There is no open scam accusation against Lauda - why did you give negative feedback to him?

I started this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2119760.0 and based on this I gave neg.

PS: I want to enforce Lauda to have same stand across all types of account dealers. Please enforce him by negging based on my accusation. Thank you.

[whywefight]

When there is no open scam accusation against me, why Lauda gives negative feedback to me ?

I remember the conventions followed here : for scam -> negative trust and for spamming -> banning

Why Lauda should be guided to be sticking within those conventions ?

You got negged because:

Account sales encourage different types of shady behavior (scams, spam, account farming, et al.). Accounts connected:
Aamir1 (u = 730643), Jimbola3 (uid = 639399), Jimbola2 (uid = 639398), Mastsetad (uid = 663185).

with a reference to: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1597201.msg16101769#msg16101769

So:

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

fits.