Wrong negative trust from lauda

[aakashsangwan]

Recently in an auction of a legendary account I placed bid and won the auction and also won a negative from lauda.

So I sent a pm to her stating

I was not buying the account to scam anyone it's just that my account is having enough activity to become a legendary member but it haven't yet become one.... So it is very frustrating for me.

And about the trust of that account, it's just I don't care about it. I was asking about the trust because many a times people try to sell negative trust accounts which are not worthy of anything.

I will cancel the deal if my account gets a negative trust for it. And BTW the owner haven't responded to any of my pm.

Please remove the negative trust from my account

And her reply was simple

No

So I just want to say that the account wasn't sold as the user selling the account haven't responded to several pm which I sent to him.
Secondly I haven't scammed someone so negative isn't necessary for my action.

[1714902125]

1714902125

[1714902125]

1714902125

[1714902125]

1714902125

[alani123]

First things first, I think that its your fault for using a high ranked account on an auction bidding for bitcoin accounts. This gives away your identity either way. Also, trust ratings are subjective and not moderated so there's not much anyone else can do. On a personal level, you could remove Lauda from your trust list and/or encourage others to do so.

[minifrij]

Account trading is untrustworthy. Due to this, Lauda is absolutely within their rights to give you a negative trust for it.

[actmyname]

"I was not buying the account to scam anyone it's just that my account is having enough activity to become a legendary member but it haven't yet become one.... So it is very frustrating for me. "

You ever see the Hero Members at 1k+ activity like deisik that were waiting to become Legendary? If you've been patient enough to post for 2 years then what's a couple more months? [on average]You wanted to get a Legendary account for the signature, right? Yeah... managing more than one account in signature campaigns usually declines the post quality exponentially. If it's likely that you'd spam/scam then why condone it?

[aakashsangwan]

Account trading is untrustworthy. Due to this, Lauda is absolutely within their rights to give you a negative trust for it.

As the account isn't sold to me, so I believe I don't deserve this negative.

[minifrij]

As the account isn't sold to me, so I believe I don't deserve this negative.

If I try to steal from someone, but don't actually do it, do I not deserve a negative?

You wanted to partake in account trading, which is untrustworthy. Therefore, you are untrustworthy.

[actmyname]

Account trading is untrustworthy. Due to this, Lauda is absolutely within their rights to give you a negative trust for it.

As the account isn't sold to me, so I believe I don't deserve this negative.

I had the intention of committing murder. I told people that specifically on this day and with this tool I would murder this individual. I conspired to commit murder. Now, do you think that people are going to wait until after the murder to stop you?It's not the act, it's the intention. And you were a participant in an account trade. It just didn't go through... from what you're saying.

[Lauda]

Never, ever, even attempt to purchase an account with green trust regardless of your *benevolent intentions*. Whether or not you have acquired it can't be known for sure, but your intent to do so has been archived.

[aakashsangwan]

Never, ever, even attempt to purchase an account with green trust regardless of your *benevolent intentions*. Whether or not you have acquired it can't be known for sure, but your intent to do so has been archived.

I told you in the pm about me that why I asked about the trust ratings of that account, as no one would in their right mind would sell their legendary account for such low price unless it is a negative rated account.
And you don't want to change my negative to neutral, even though you have changed the same for other users who were "HEAVILY" involved in the account trading business.

[Lauda]

I told you in the pm about me that why I asked about the trust ratings of that account, as no one would in their right mind would sell their legendary account for such low price unless it is a negative rated account.

You need to look up the word 'intent' in a dictionary.

And you don't want to change my negative to neutral, even though you have changed the same for other users who were "HEAVILY" involved in the account trading business.

That was a mistake / I was deceived by people who were acting to be genuinely concerned about those ratings. I'm making those right by tagging people once again. Additionally, just because I do X for someone that does not mean that I have to do X for you (or to you), not that this is applicable.

[aakashsangwan]

That was a mistake / I was deceived by people who were acting to be genuinely concerned about those ratings. I'm making those right by tagging people once again. Additionally, just because I do X for someone that does not mean that I have to do X for you (or to you), not that this is applicable.

It doesn't mean that a person will have to go to prison for the conspiracy of a murder. Am I right @actmyname
And receiving negative is same as going to prison for an intent to kill someone, since the account trade isn't happened I don't deserve a negative, you can give a neutral, but surely no negative. And I am given this negative trust rating wrongly as the owner haven't come online since the last bid.

[Lauda]

It doesn't mean that a person will have to go to prison for the conspiracy of a murder. Am I right @actmyname

If you had intent to murder, and *attempted it*, and someone stopped you then you would go to prison (given you were sued). It does not even matter at what point you were stopped (e.g. on the road whilst going to the house of the target). Read: Attempted murder. This shares similarity but obviously you can't compare the two.

And receiving negative is same as going to prison for an intent to kill someone, since the account trade isn't happened I don't deserve a negative, you can give a neutral, but surely no negative.

Correction: You don't deserve a negative rating in your opinion. I'm sure that many account farmers/traders/scammers will agree with you on this matter.

[minifrij]

And receiving negative is same as going to prison for an intent to kill someone, since the account trade isn't happened I don't deserve a negative, you can give a neutral, but surely no negative. And I am given this negative trust rating wrongly as the owner haven't come online since the last bid.

You've dealt with shady account trades in the past. You haven't learned from that, and then intended to buy another account.

You deserve this negative, and I would be very disappointed in Lauda if they were to remove it.

[actmyname]

It doesn't mean that a person will have to go to prison for the conspiracy of a murder. Am I right @actmyname

No. If you have the intent and were going to proceed with the murder but were stopped by a police officer right before you did it, does that excuse you of all guilt? You were willing to go through with it... until you were caught.

Enjoy your red paint.

[aakashsangwan]

So there is no way for it to get neutral.

[winspiral]

I have got 16 wrong negative trust and I'm till alive...
Do not worry one can live with wrong negative trust.

[Lauda]

So there is no way for it to get neutral.

Your previous ratings either were negative to being with or were neutral because you were involved in account sales. You were explicitly told to stop doing that in one rating, yet you persisted, thus I'm going to say no.

I have got 16 wrong negative trust..

You have 3 proper negative trust ratings from DT members, well-deserved ratings that is. "Wrong".

[Xavofat]

A good comparison is Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons:

Attempted murder! Do they give a nobel prize for attempted chemistry?

Basically you're saying "I tried to engage in an untrustworthy action, but it didn't end up happening so therefore I'm trustworthy".  It doesn't work that way.

Now, do you think that people are going to wait until after the murder to stop you?

Also, in the account trade we wouldn't know which account the OP had bought, so we wouldn't know what they intended to do with the account.  Even if it was just to pretend to have a higher rank, it's not like that's a positive action anyway.

[winspiral]

So there is no way for it to get neutral.

Your previous ratings either were negative to being with or were neutral because you were involved in account sales. You were explicitly told to stop doing that in one rating, yet you persisted, thus I'm going to say no.

I have got 16 wrong negative trust..

You have 3 proper negative trust ratings from DT members, well-deserved ratings that is. "Wrong".

DT members does not mean right members...
I know that my 16 negative trust are wrong and this is enough for me...
My members know that I'm not a scammer or what you want and this is enough for me.

[Lauda]

A good comparison is Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons:

Attempted murder! Do they give a nobel prize for attempted chemistry?

Basically you're saying "I tried to engage in an untrustworthy action, but it didn't end up happening so therefore I'm trustworthy".  It doesn't work that way.

The user has a habit of doing this, thus I don't see any possible way that they could weasel their way out of it now.

DT members does not mean right members...

Correct, but in the super majority of cases it is right.

I know that my 16 negative trust are wrong and this is enough for me...My members know that I'm not a scammer or what you want and this is enough for me.

Which has nothing to do with the truth. You deserved those ratings (if not more). Could you already stop whining, posting off-topic and go do whatever it is that you do?