aTriz and Lauda just got merit!

[endlasuresh]

Also you haven't mentioned where you met Lauda in the past?

I have never seen Lauda at any of the god parties.

Then you must seen somewhere to Lauda.
Back to on topic

You gotta admit you see their point.

There is no point. I can leave merit to whomever I want[1], wherever I want and in whatever amount I want. If you don't like it, then ask theymos to change the rules.
[1] This works when you don't have an army of alts (see Quickseller et. al.).

Wow.  Just wow.  Leaving negative trust for others and admitting to engaging in the exact same behavior.  I am embarrassed for anyone that still respects Lauda at this point.

I spy with my little eye:



1:1 What you and naypalm did, the difference being that he transferred more points.  
Oh wait, he maxed it out at 50!

Fixed the sneaky out-of-context smear attempt. No wonder she left.

http://bit.ly/1m2omU7

There has been no love in that shack for a very long time.

Everyone will spy with their eyes, if cant they use magnifier lens, BTW can i send merit points to someone and receive them back?

But I don't need them since it is not useful for me.

[1715089539]

1715089539

[1715089539]

1715089539

[1715089539]

1715089539

[actisstupidname]

Lauda/aTriz, your boy just got caught plagiarizing. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2973511.0

[darklus123]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

[JayJuanGee]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

When I wrote that statement, I was attempting to respond to Lauda's assertion that selling/trading merit was not clear from the forum rules.  Further, in the past month, I had been a little bit concerned that some members were being tagged with Red trust in terms of accusations of selling/trading/soliciting merit even though the rules were not clear regarding that conduct.

So, yeah, I attempted to point out a couple of statements by Theymos regarding trading/ selling or soliciting merit. 

I think that regarding merit sources, the rule is fairly clear that merit sources are prohibited to engage in any kind of behavior to sell or trade merit or to solicit such. 

However, regarding regular members, it seems that technically it is not against the forum rules to sell/trade merit; however, it still would not prohibit other members from giving negative trust to regular members who are engaging in such selling/trading or even soliciting of merit (maybe if soliciting rises to the level of "excessive begging?"). 

So personally, I believe that for regular members it still probably would not be a good idea to sell or trade merit or to attempt to do so through soliciting, even though technically it does not appear to be against any specific merit rule - but it could still attract negative trust because it seems like a dubious kind of behavior....

I think that Theymos's is specific comment about NOT focusing on merit trading/selling of regular members being a "rounding error" is valid too, because the initially distributed merit is going to run out, and therefore the initial distribution of merit does not add up to a lot of merit that would end up being abused through selling/trading. 

Therefore, it seems that it would be a kind of judgement call regarding how much selling/trading of merit behavior would justify giving negative trust.

[darklus123]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

When I wrote that statement, I was attempting to respond to Lauda's assertion that selling/trading merit was not clear from the forum rules.  Further, in the past month, I had been a little bit concerned that some members were being tagged with Red trust in terms of accusations of selling/trading/soliciting merit even though the rules were not clear regarding that conduct.

So, yeah, I attempted to point out a couple of statements by Theymos regarding trading/ selling or soliciting merit. 

I think that regarding merit sources, the rule is fairly clear that merit sources are prohibited to engage in any kind of behavior to sell or trade merit or to solicit such. 

However, regarding regular members, it seems that technically it is not against the forum rules to sell/trade merit; however, it still would not prohibit other members from giving negative trust to regular members who are engaging in such selling/trading or even soliciting of merit (maybe if soliciting rises to the level of "excessive begging?"). 

So personally, I believe that for regular members it still probably would not be a good idea to sell or trade merit or to attempt to do so through soliciting, even though technically it does not appear to be against any specific merit rule - but it could still attract negative trust because it seems like a dubious kind of behavior....

I think that Theymos's is specific comment about NOT focusing on merit trading/selling of regular members being a "rounding error" is valid too, because the initially distributed merit is going to run out, and therefore the initial distribution of merit does not add up to a lot of merit that would end up being abused through selling/trading. 

Therefore, it seems that it would be a kind of judgement call regarding how much selling/trading of merit behavior would justify giving negative trust.

Even if I do agree that selling or trading of merit is a complete dishonest. If the rules were not clear or would say that this certain act is not illegal then yeah probably giving a negative trust who is doing so is really a complete judgement call.

Tho this system was just released and it still has any loop holes that can be abused by anyone. I believe that there will be a lot of changes especially to this kind of issue which has always been issue for trust ratings.

[STT]

'Illegal'  would not be the case as its just a minor issue on the forum, I can see how they might count it as a negative generally though.      Merit to me is like a bookmark or a like on facebook, not a big deal just a nice feature.   Its only at the low ranks its literally going to determine gaining a higher rank, to weed out poor use of forum.   So in that context, enabling a spammer would still be really bad and merit would show evidence of that perhaps

[endlasuresh]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

According to the rules it should be Tagged, but it wasn't and the staff even aware of it. did you read this thread where this person got tagged for merit system.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2983886.0

[Red Painter]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

According to the rules it should be Tagged, but it wasn't and the staff even aware of it. did you read this thread where this person got tagged for merit system.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2983886.0

The dude was doing merit abuse which AFAIK isnt against the rules yet but is 100% taggable by a DT member and that's what happened

[endlasuresh]

I thought that initially Theymos had written something in the OP of the merit announcement thread about merit sources being prohibited from selling merit, but he seems to have reworded it and removed such language, but i am sure that he said it.

Therefore, I conclude that selling of merit is not illegal right? Since it is just a form of trading which theymos already have stated that it should not be an issue? Trading merit is pretty obvious tho. Unlike selling it in which it stays between the two persons involved. Good point there that if a certain user sells its merit then it isn't illegal? Correct me if im wrong then that certain user should not be tagged?

According to the rules it should be Tagged, but it wasn't and the staff even aware of it. did you read this thread where this person got tagged for merit system.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2983886.0

The dude was doing merit abuse which AFAIK isnt against the rules yet but is 100% taggable by a DT member and that's what happened

So are you sure the guy is abusing merit system? If yes or not also the topic names would have tagged, but it wasn't till today.
BTW I haven't asked this thing to you anyway thanks for answering to questions, soon the public will know the real truth.

[HALLASTERA]

Another proffesional spender
Account connected Xynerise - 1250855 and DannyHamilton - 60820 - selling smerits.
That guy rewarded me "Merit farming (something intended to be EARNED) is a dishonest way to acquire it. Clearly this user is not trustworthy" without reference - good job  

[actmyname]

[...]
Account connected Xynerise - 1250855 and DannyHamilton - 60820 - selling smerits.
That guy rewarded me "Merit farming (something intended to be EARNED) is a dishonest way to acquire it. Clearly this user is not trustworthy" without reference - good job  

Betwixt your own cheeks
You extract an argument
Yet, their posts are good.Your proof does fall short of a framework
So go browse some more, that's your homework
Worry not little runt
And quit being a cunt
Least Xynerise can post 'bout the network

Poetic justice.

[HALLASTERA]

[...]
Account connected Xynerise - 1250855 and DannyHamilton - 60820 - selling smerits.
That guy rewarded me "Merit farming (something intended to be EARNED) is a dishonest way to acquire it. Clearly this user is not trustworthy" without reference - good job  

Betwixt your own cheeks
You extract an argument
Yet, their posts are good.Your proof does fall short of a framework
So go browse some more, that's your homework
Worry not little runt
And quit being a cunt
Least Xynerise can post 'bout the network

Poetic justice.

We should not waste time on it. There on screen we can see whats happened for 5 mins. I'm tired of trying to prove everybody legendary about their negative moves against newbies.

[actmyname]

We should not waste time on it. There on screen we can see whats happened for 5 mins. I'm tired of trying to prove everybody legendary about their negative moves against newbies.

I tire of your crazed indignancy
These efforts in vain—a futility
Your words make no sense
Such a foolish offense
Won't you just stop this crass hostility?

[scam_detector]

We should not waste time on it. There on screen we can see whats happened for 5 mins. I'm tired of trying to prove everybody legendary about their negative moves against newbies.

I tire of your crazed indignancy
These efforts in vain—a futility
Your words make no sense
Such a foolish offense
Won't you just stop this crass hostility?

That definitely has to be Eminem.
These rhymes are eminent.  /s

[OgNasty]

We should not waste time on it. There on screen we can see whats happened for 5 mins. I'm tired of trying to prove everybody legendary about their negative moves against newbies.

I tire of your crazed indignancy
These efforts in vain—a futility
Your words make no sense
Such a foolish offense
Won't you just stop this crass hostility?

That definitely has to be Eminem.
These rhymes are eminent.  /s

Reminded me more of this.