Someone lowered my trust, I don't know why. What recourse?

[tspacepilot]

I will help you:


1) TradeFortress.
2) Only recourse is to have an agreement with TF. Only agreement is to repay what he wants.


Now, you got the answer. Whatever you will say is worthless.

Only agreement is to pay what he wants?!  Does this guy work for tradefortess?  Or he simply is an alt for tradefortess?  If the former, I hope you dont ever end up on his bad side or I'll be the one quoting this post in your complaint thread.

[DeathProxy]

You have 2 choices

1. Refund TF and apologize
2. Create new alt and back to square 1

[tspacepilot]

You have 2 choices

1. Refund TF and apologize
2. Create new alt and back to square 1

The tf alt patrol seems to be marching through this thread.

[Mitchell]

Did you just seriously called me a sockpuppet? Because I agree with TF's opinion? You must be an idiot.

[DeathProxy]

You have 2 choices

1. Refund TF and apologize
2. Create new alt and back to square 1

The tf alt patrol seems to be marching through this thread.

I'm in no way affiliated with TF.

You create a bot and spam coinchat and withdraw bitcoin. You are not following the rules. Is that hard to understand?
 

[SaltySpitoon]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

[tysat]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

[r3wt]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

in this particular case maybe....

[zackclark70]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken  

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

[zackclark70]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

yet again staff persecuting someone with no evidence 

[r3wt]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken  

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

[tysat]

...

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

in this particular case maybe....

I'm only talking about this specific situation, if you're implying that I said TF is always right then you are wrong.

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken 

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

This one is getting a lot of attention because it's in Meta not Scam Accusations.

[zackclark70]

...

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

in this particular case maybe....

I'm only talking about this specific situation, if you're implying that I said TF is always right then you are wrong.

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken 

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

This one is getting a lot of attention because it's in Meta not Scam Accusations.

the main point I was making is that trade fortress has not provided and evidence that it was the bot that earned the money and not a human as the op says they were talking on there a lot and testing a bot so most of it could be legit and only a small % be the bot we don't know as there is no evidence been shown ether way yet everyone here is taking sides 

[Mitchell]

You check the terms and conditions of a site, before signing up. That is kind of the expectation that you understand the rules of a site before using it.

The rules explicitly state that all bots must have "bot" in the name so that they Do not get paid for chatting. You make a bot that does not follow those rules, and illegitimately gain .5 BTC. I cant understand what the misunderstanding his here, you stole .5 BTC from Tradefortress by using a bot that was not allowed. You get paid for chatting on coinchat, not having a bot spam for you, and because of your bot, Tradefortress is out .5BTC hence the negative trust.

I'm really not understanding where the question of, why don't I get negative trust for stealing .5BTC from someone? If it was an honest mistake, you would have seen that it was against the rules, said oh sorry, and returned the ill gotten coins.

Edit* And after thinking it over, I don't really buy that you werent aware of the rules in the first place. Why would you have named your bot b0t rather than bot had you not known that names with bot don't get paid?

This is indeed very strange. This would suggest that the OP is lying about it.

[tspacepilot]

...

Salty sums this up well, I agree with him.  OP looks to be completely in the wrong here, TF in the right.

in this particular case maybe....

I'm only talking about this specific situation, if you're implying that I said TF is always right then you are wrong.

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken  

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

This one is getting a lot of attention because it's in Meta not Scam Accusations.

the main point I was making is that trade fortress has not provided and evidence that it was the bot that earned the money and not a human as the op says they were talking on there a lot and testing a bot so most of it could be legit and only a small % be the bot we don't know as there is no evidence been shown ether way yet everyone here is taking sides  

Thank you.  It's refreshing for someone to finally respond with something other than 'pay tf or be shunned'!

Even if I do owe tf something because he paid me for messages that he wishes he hadn't paid me for, the total would probably amount to something closer to 0.01.  In any case my total withdraws on the site dont amount to more than 0.35 so the .5 figure is outlandish.  I note again that he started off at 1.5, then dropped it by 1/3 when people weee taking my side on this thread.

Still this is missing the goddamn point.  tf runs a site that gives away money for chatting.  I chatted for hours and hours and received money.  Tf decided he doesn't want me there anymore, fine.  How does this give him any right to lie about me on bitcointalk.org?  He is suggesting that he and I had some currency trade agreement and that I didn't follow through.  That is false.  I have entered into 0  marketplacd transactions and tf's grudges against former users should not be taken out by him on their trust ratings.  If he is going to act like that, I think it's a strong reason to remove him from the default trust list so that at least new users can make up their mind for themselves about people he holds grudges against.

Again, he suggests variously that I am spamming or defrauding or stealing, sometimes 1.5 btc sometimes other amounts, all based on his whimsy and with 0 supporting evidence.  How is any of this relevant to the marketplace trust?  Even he admits it's not, that it's based on his personal grudge with me about how I used coinchat some months ago.

[gotpetum]

What matters is if TF used the trust system in accordance with its rules. According to theymos,

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this…

Therefore, TF can use feedback for whatever he wants. If it becomes frivolous, then people will ignore TF's trust or the entire trust system. Action does not need to be taken by the trust system admins.

Since I tend to be very conservative when it comes to deciding if something is unethical, it sounds like TF gave someone .5 BTC because his banning mechanism and bot detection were inadequate, and now he's retaliating through the trust system. However, the OP was gaming the system (coinchat) and not following the rules, and other people would call that unethical. TF would go so far as to say that it's stealing! It's hard to determine if that makes someone trustworthy without a definition of trust that everyone agrees on.

[r3wt]

What matters is if TF used the trust system in accordance with its rules. According to theymos,

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this…

Therefore, TF can use feedback for whatever he wants. If it becomes frivolous, then people will ignore TF's trust or the entire trust system. Action does not need to be taken by the trust system admins.

as said before TF is not in default trust list, therefore most people will never even see the negative rating.

[tspacepilot]

What matters is if TF used the trust system in accordance with its rules. According to theymos,

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this…

Therefore, TF can use feedback for whatever he wants. If it becomes frivolous, then people will ignore TF's trust or the entire trust system. Action does not need to be taken by the trust system admins.

Since I tend to be very conservative when it comes to deciding if something is unethical, it sounds like TF gave someone .5 BTC because his banning mechanism and bot detection were inadequate, and now he's retaliating through the trust system. However, the OP was gaming the system (coinchat) and not following the rules, and other people would call that unethical. TF would go so far as to say that it's stealing! It's hard to determine if that makes someone trustworthy without a definition of trust that everyone agrees on.

Thank you very much for a reasonable and thoughtful response.  I really only have two small points of disagreement.  The first is that my total withdrawl from coinchat dont amount to more than 0.35, so the 0.5 amount is obviously trumped up.  This is obviously part of the argument that you are elegantly deciding not to be involved with but I wish to make the correction.

The second is that while you are right that if the trust system becomes frivolous, users will eventualky ignore it, there's an assymetry here in that some people are listed as trustworthy by default.  So when those people use the trust system frivolously, it endangers the system (and their victims) even more.  Therefore I believe that the trust system admins do need to reconsider their inclusion of tf on that list of default users to be trusted (or whether such a reified list should exist at all).

Finally, can someone provide a link to a concise description of the trust system and its proper usage?

[tspacepilot]

What matters is if TF used the trust system in accordance with its rules. According to theymos,

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this…

Therefore, TF can use feedback for whatever he wants. If it becomes frivolous, then people will ignore TF's trust or the entire trust system. Action does not need to be taken by the trust system admins.

as said before TF is not in default trust list, therefore most people will never even see the negative rating.

I don't think this is right as I only discovered the negative rating because it did show up next to my posts (before I removed default trust).  In any case this is one of the few facts in dispute on this thread which can be empirically measured by anyone

[SaltySpitoon]

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken  

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it

No, that is not true at all. tspacepilot opened the thread up, asking what happened. Tradefortress explained it to him, and rather than tspacepilot saying, No I never took the coins, or no, it wasn't me, they said, no, I never saw the rules so its ok that I took the coin.

tspacepilot has admitted to chatting using a bot containing the name b0t rather than bot, and withdrawing about .5BTC rather than 1.5BTC, in light of that, how can you say there is no evidence?