Bitcoin Forum
November 22, 2019, 09:24:52 PM *
News: The forum is 10 years old today!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Trust system abuse / DT2 member Vod is provably dishonestly rating people  (Read 5345 times)
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 4307


nanny of the forum


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 03:52:57 PM
 #421

DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.

Is that something DT1 members told you or did you make that up?

1574457892
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574457892

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574457892
Reply with quote  #2

1574457892
Report to moderator
1574457892
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574457892

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574457892
Reply with quote  #2

1574457892
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin Forum is turning 10 years old! Join the community in sharing and exploring the notable posts made over the years.
Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 04:18:18 PM
 #422

DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.

Is that something DT1 members told you or did you make that up?

What's your point? To derail this thread even more with irrelevant stuff to make it even more incomprehensible for everyone to see what Vod is doing?

Anyway,
DT1's are inactive regarding trust list changes. You know this, you've been around, so why question this?
I'm sure people like Cyrus have tons of other things to do than go read some boring & complex situation about one single DT abuse/misuse case. This stands for other DT1's as well as to people in general.

There's no point talking with intellectually dishonest and unfair people like you, so I'm not proving you anything, so let's settle your question by me choosing your latter option as an answer. You still haven't commented anything about Vod's wrongdoing. All you do in this thread is trying to bash me. Wonder what's your agenda... I guess it aligns somewhat well with what someone said elsewhere about you: "Suchmoon always sides with people they feel are on the higher position." Think about this, if it's unintentional.

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 4307


nanny of the forum


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 06:13:10 PM
 #423

DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.

Is that something DT1 members told you or did you make that up?

What's your point? To derail this thread even more with irrelevant stuff to make it even more incomprehensible for everyone to see what Vod is doing?

Anyway,
DT1's are inactive regarding trust list changes. You know this, you've been around, so why question this?
I'm sure people like Cyrus have tons of other things to do than go read some boring & complex situation about one single DT abuse/misuse case. This stands for other DT1's as well as to people in general.

There's no point talking with intellectually dishonest and unfair people like you, so I'm not proving you anything, so let's settle your question by me choosing your latter option as an answer. You still haven't commented anything about Vod's wrongdoing. All you do in this thread is trying to bash me. Wonder what's your agenda... I guess it aligns somewhat well with what someone said elsewhere about you: "Suchmoon always sides with people they feel are on the higher position." Think about this, if it's unintentional.

You're making what sounds like a statement of fact but it turns out to be false or at least misleading. Do you really not see a problem with that and with the statements you're making in your thread in general?

You could have said that (a) you didn't get a response from DT1, or (b) you think they're not responding for the reasons you listed above. It was your own choice to word it in a way that makes you look like a liar, which is not the first time in this thread and also appears to be one of the reasons for your red trust. You could have explained afterwards that it's just your speculation and that would be ok but instead you decided to double down on it. Pro tip: if you don't want to derail your thread with irrelevant stuff - don't post irrelevant stuff.

My disagreement with you doesn't mean I'm bashing you personally, while on the other hand you are trying to make it personal. I have nothing to gain by "siding" with Vod. I do trust his judgement far more that yours though.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 06:23:05 PM
 #424

You're making what sounds like a statement of fact but it turns out to be false or at least misleading. Do you really not see a problem with that and with the statements you're making in your thread in general?

Didn't I predict this? It's false and misleading only in your own mind. Statements like that Vod blackmailed/threatened me by giving me an option to remove my rating or be red rated -- what's wrong with that and why are you not saying anything about it even though I've asked you to. You seem to be here only to derail the thread away from the important stuff. Didn't I predict this..

You could have said that (a) you didn't get a response from DT1, or (b) you think they're not responding for the reasons you listed above. It was your own choice to word it in a way that makes you look like a liar, which is not the first time in this thread and also appears to be one of the reasons for your red trust. You could have explained afterwards that it's just your speculation and that would be ok but instead you decided to double down on it. Pro tip: if you don't want to derail your thread with irrelevant stuff - don't post irrelevant stuff.

My disagreement with you doesn't mean I'm bashing you personally, while on the other hand you are trying to make it personal. I have nothing to gain by "siding" with Vod. I do trust his judgement far more that yours though.

I did get responses. They align with what I said. And no, not proving you anything. It doesn't really matter why they're not acting on this. It matters that they have this power.

It's quite insane how you still try to change the pointing fingers at me. Guess that's the way of BCT. Again, Vod blackmailed/threatened me and then he red-rated me. Address that for once. You don't need to trust anyone's "judgement" as these are facts, available for you to go and verify.

I PM'd you -- we can keep discussing whatever you want in there if you truly want communication between you and me. Otherwise, don't bother. No more derailing of this thread.

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 4307


nanny of the forum


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 06:43:36 PM
 #425

Didn't I predict this? It's false and misleading only in your own mind.

Ok. So let's try again - is this something DT1 members told you?

DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.

I did get responses. They align with what I said. And no, not proving you anything. It doesn't really matter why they're not acting on this. It matters that they have this power.

I take that as a "no". So I'd say stating it the way you did was false or at least misleading.

It's quite insane how you still try to change the pointing fingers at me. Guess that's the way of BCT. Again, Vod blackmailed/threatened me and then he red-rated me. Address that for once. You don't need to trust anyone's "judgement" as these are facts, available for you to go and verify.

I've seen your "facts" numerous times. While I might've had some doubts early in this thread - I don't anymore. Your fallacy-laden posts show that Vod's feedback is useful to the community.

OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3108
Merit: 1741


I 💚 Bitcoin


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 06:50:37 PM
 #426

Bad ratings happen sometimes. Look at the garbage ratings owcatz has left me (who you trust). I believe bidding on your own auctions is much more warranting a negative mark on your record. One thing is certain though, people who want on DT to gain more bargaining power over others are the exact type of users that DT needs to keep out of the trust network. I think that’s what you aren’t understanding. The timing on Vod’s rating is crap, but it’s not like others haven’t received bad ratings for less. I would agree that worse things have been swept under the rug as well. For instance, minerjones doxxing Canaryinthemine, or hosting an auction for TMAN and allowing him to manipulate it, or doing a non-transparent ICO escrow with Lauda and Blazed while moving funds to a single centralized party without any explanation leading to massive losses for investors. Is DT perfect? No. Is there abuse that gets swept under the rug because people don’t want to make waves? Sure. However, your case is far from the worst abuse, and adding in more members who want to make the problem worse by leveraging their positions to sweep more bad behavior under the rug is not a step in the right direction. That being said, I’m always on the lookout for users with good judgement to add to DT2.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 07:26:37 PM
 #427

Bad ratings happen sometimes. Look at the garbage ratings owcatz has left me (who you trust).
Owlcatz is not on my trust list. I've left him a positive rating, because I've traded with him and everything was top notch when doing business with him. I don't agree with all the ratings owlcatz has left, and neither do I agree with all the ratings you've sent. Trust is not like that. Smiley

I believe bidding on your own auctions is much more warranting a negative mark on your record.
How so? It's not scamming or dishonest behavior in any way. Nobody was scammed. Auction rules were same for everyone. Different standard was followed than what BCT users are used to. And it was a single occasion almost 3 years ago, never happened when I learned about the auction standard regarding self-bids here. This event warrants wrecking a dark green trust score? In any case, this rating is still not about that auction.

Regardless of anything, Vod red-rated me after threatening to do so unless I removed my rating. Is that acceptable rating activity by a DT2 member?

One thing is certain though, people who want on DT to gain more bargaining power over others are the exact type of users that DT needs to keep out of the trust network. I think that’s what you aren’t understanding.

Maybe in general, yes. My case is not about me wanting "bargaining power". I want fairness, and it's not happening right now. Vod won't be dropped from DT as this is way too "mild" misuse/abuse. Like you say, worse have been swept under the rug. I would see that a resolution to this could be found in practice only if I were on DT2 as well. DT should not be used for anything like this at all, but it is what it is. DT should not be any elite group, but just a group of people perceived to be trustworthy enough to not scam others. But most of all I would want DT system to go away completely.

The timing on Vod’s rating is crap, but it’s not like others haven’t received bad ratings for less.

The timing? Vod rated me red because he told me that it would happen unless I changed my rating. It's all in the public PM conversation found in the links earlier in this thread.

However, your case is far from the worst abuse, and adding in more members who want to make the problem worse by leveraging their positions to sweep more bad behavior under the rug is not a step in the right direction. That being said, I’m always on the lookout for users with good judgement to add to DT2.

I see that the proper way to make DT better overall is to add a lot more DT1 and DT2 members. Then the perceived trustness of the whole thing would drop, encouraging people to make own custom lists more eagerly. Still DT would do what it's supposed to do: protect new people from getting scammed. More DT members would mean much more active curating and much more opinions and the highly appreciated decentralization. It would make DT much less a tool or a status symbol. People are trusting DT way too much and it's objectively not a good thing. Why not start changing how DT is used and perceived?

It would be good if DT didn't give anyone any significant "leverage". More members on DT1/DT2 would mean much less "leverage" and also much easier access to the DT. It's not like there aren't hundreds of members in the forums who are quite trustworthy but for one reason or another not in the list, and can't get on the list either. For example, people would see my attempts to get on DT purely as "wants to get back at Vod, that's bad!". I'm sure Vod knows the dynamics of DT too. But would e.g. you add me on the DT if Vod didn't rate me at all?


OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3108
Merit: 1741


I 💚 Bitcoin


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:27:47 PM
 #428

But most of all I would want DT system to go away completely.

You want DT to add you or go away. Got it. There’s really no need for 22 pages of arguing. I’ve already shown an example of why your behavior was not acceptable in the auction industry and how the top action house laughed at me for questioning if it was. You continuing to argue that you did nothing wrong is ridiculous. You wanting on DT when you think it should be abolished is equally ridiculous. I’ve spent enough time in PMs trying to show you the light, but you refuse to listen. You can’t be helped if you refuse to grow.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:31:57 PM
Last edit: November 27, 2018, 09:01:34 PM by Anduck
 #429

You want DT to add you or go away. Got it.

Optimal solution would be if Vod analyzed his behavior and removed his rating. As that's not going to happen (at least when I'm not also on DT), and DT1's are not going to exclude Vod, the only remaining option is DT reform/removal. Me being on DT would possibly help achieve the optimal solution.

Solutions to fixing DT completely would be a reform / removal. The above are regarding this abuse case. So shortly: I think that optimal solution for my case would be if Vod stopped this abuse/harassing. Optimal solution for the forum would be to reform/remove DT.


how the top action house laughed at me for questioning if it was.

Laughing doesn't mean they think it as scamming or dishonest behavior. Also, this is TOTALLY NORMAL in my country. I'm not in the States.

You continuing to argue that you did nothing wrong is ridiculous.

Who did I scam? How were I dishonest? I did nothing wrong. Think about it! The only thing there was inconvenience caused to some people due to BCT auction practice-formed standards not being met. Auction rules were same for everyone, including me. Vod told me he finds nothing in what I did as untrustworthy ("I decided what you did wasn't untrustworthy to me"). After blackmailing me and failing at it, he red-rated me using this auction as the reason. Tell me who was scammed and how, and what was the wrongdoing in my auction. Are people who agree with me here regarding self-bidding ridiculous as well? Like theymos?

You wanting on DT when you think it should be abolished is equally ridiculous.

I don't follow your logic here. If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better. Also regardless of this Vod abuse case.

I’ve spent enough time in PMs trying to show you the light, but you refuse to listen. You can’t be helped if you refuse to grow.

What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?

eddie13
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 1119


BTC or BUST


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:43:43 PM
Merited by o_e_l_e_o (2)
 #430

As I commented months ago on the first thread you created on this matter I think a policy non-escalation from you would have been the best from the very beginning.
That along with admitting and repenting for your mistake likely would have solved the issue before you had to start any thread at all.  Which you still won't..
It's not unethical for auctioneer to bid on an auction.
You really still feel that way after so many respected members have tried to correct your viewpoint?

Despite this your protests have been wildly successful gaining yourself 2 DT counter positives though you seem to have manages to piss off suchmoon which so far has only resulted in a neutral.  

But you still are not satisfied even though you are back in the black.
Now you are asking to be added to DT because you feel the only solution is for your multiple retaliatory feedbacks left on him to hold as much weight as his on you.
I would see that a resolution to this could be found in practice only if I were on DT2 as well.

I'm not sure how others feel but I think asking for DT is questionably shady akin to asking for positive feedback but I have not come across a conclusive discussion of that matter.  

This Space For Rent
Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:50:32 PM
 #431

As I commented months ago on the first thread you created on this matter I think a policy non-escalation from you would have been the best from the very beginning.
That along with admitting and repenting for your mistake likely would have solved the issue before you had to start any thread at all.  Which you still won't..
It's not unethical for auctioneer to bid on an auction.
You really still feel that way after so many respected members have tried to correct your viewpoint?

It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers?

But you still are not satisfied even though you are back in the black.

The wrongdoing hasn't changed at all.

Now you are asking to be added to DT because you feel the only solution is for your multiple retaliatory feedbacks left on him to hold as much weight as his on you.

Retaliatory? Vod blackmailed me, lies about me in his rating (I did not admit anything to him even though he claims so), rated me 2 years after the auction event he uses as his main argument etc. Again DT should not be any kind of elite club. It should merely include those who are unlikely to scam others. It's that simple.. Or should be that simple, but is apparently not.

I think asking for DT is questionably shady

It should not be an elite club where only the bestest of the best are invited. I see nothing wrong in asking to be added to the list of people unlikely to scam others. Tell me what DT should be if it's not what I describe it should be. Also I'm very interested in how you see the DT... as obviously you see it as something else than "list of people unlikely to scam others".

eddie13
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 1119


BTC or BUST


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:51:46 PM
Merited by OgNasty (1)
 #432

What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
users with good judgement

Giving someone positive trust means you think they are unlikely to scam. Adding someone to DT (I hope) means you trust their judgement on others situations, their honesty, morality, and believe they would always strive to do the right thing even when it may not be in their best interest to do so. That you think their judgment and ratings are beneficial to the community.

This Space For Rent
Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 08:55:26 PM
Last edit: November 27, 2018, 09:06:20 PM by Anduck
 #433


What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
users with good judgement

Giving someone positive trust means you think they are unlikely to scam. Adding someone to DT (I hope) means you trust their judgement on others situations, their honesty, morality, and believe they would always strive to do the right thing even when it may not be in their best interest to do so.

Shouldn't it be this way:

"Giving someone positive trust means you think they are unlikely to scam." Exactly. And adding someone on DT means you trust their judgement to do the same -- nothing more.

Why is DT not like this and why do you think it shouldn't be like this instead of your view of it?


As I commented months ago on the first thread you created on this matter I think a policy non-escalation from you would have been the best from the very beginning.

Agree. I attempted that. Vod misunderstood me. Vod wanted resolve this when he thought I was on DT, but when realizing I was not on DT, he first blackmailed/threatened me and then blocked me. See the PM conversation.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 09:14:00 PM
 #434

Ognasty and others, go see e.g. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=51173 e.g. BayAreaCoins rating. That's a case where auction rules were changed during auction by mprep. But I know nobody will do anything about it. OgNasty even has him on his trust list... Go ask USA auction houses what they think about that. I can tell you that auction rules should never be changed during auction, and is not accepted by any standards anywhere. Thread about that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3147489.0

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142
Merit: 4307


nanny of the forum


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 09:28:06 PM
 #435

I'm not sure how others feel but I think asking for DT is questionably shady akin to asking for positive feedback but I have not come across a conclusive discussion of that matter.  

I think it's shady. The only other person I recall doing this was Quickseller when Blazed was expanding his list.

It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers?

It's dishonest to do so without disclosing such possibility. You've been told this numerous times but you keep omitting this part.


pugman
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1378


Sliding in ya DM's be like


View Profile WWW
November 27, 2018, 09:32:43 PM
 #436

I don't follow your logic here. If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better. Also regardless of this Vod abuse case.
Yeah no, that's a weird way of seeing things, but very prevalent. Why would you want to be on DT even, so that you could give Vod a taste of his own medicine? And then what? Honestly, you can just stop giving a fuck about the trust score of yours because it DOESN'T MATTER(FUN FACT!), and if you really are persistent on this, ignore vod from your trust lists, you could try persuading DT1 members to remove Vod but that is highly unlikely.

You're only scared that people won't trade with you, because of the rating, right.? Well,  actmyname countered that rating,and gmaxwell's rating also makes your rating look much better, so if people still don't want to trade with you(excluding all the plausible reasons), then you probably just shouldn't trade with them in the first place, cause they are stupid to nuts.

What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
DT is definitely not that type of lists. DT members have gone rogue, and you shouldn't be surprised if someone in the current DT list/s go rogue as well. DT was supposed to help people in the trading community by watching out for scammers and shit, well, now its just totally different, people tag for all the reasons trust for which trust system wasn't really intended for. I guess you just have to adjust according to change, or... just stop giving two fucks about it. Trust me , BEST THING EVER!  Cheesy

What Og is trying to tell you is that most people see self-bidding to be unethical especially when you don't state anything about it, so Vod's rating isn't wrong, the timing of the rating and couple of other factors is.

The current situation is beyond ridiculous. DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.
Or... There's another possible and realistic reason and that is: Vod has given out so many ratings to people that are actually valid and rock solid, and removing him for one rating is just outright stupid. Removing Vod would only lead to more chaos than this. Vod shouldn't have done what he did about him asking you to remove his ratings, but he did it anyway, naivety happens, but he could try making up for it, its his wish. And by making I don't necessarily mean to remove the rating completely.

This case isn't complex, either people are way too stupid to understand(which they are) or they don't care enough.


1) Change DT dramatically, ie. remove it completely. I would welcome that change...
2) Remove Vod from DT. (Not going to happen as described above.)
3) Add me to DT which would probably make Vod want to resolve this. That happened when Vod thought I was on DT, he was very eager to resolve it. When he found out I was not on DT, his eagerness changed to blocking me.
1. I wouldn't mind that but then again, I don't care, and also good luck with that ever happening! 4head!
2. Refer to what I said above.
3. How is adding you to DT changing anything? Your rating would just show an effect on Vod's trust score. You should be added to DT if your rating leads to killing depression and idiotic dumbfuckers, bitcoin reaching 1 Billion dollar a piece, and that Trump has been a woman in disguise all along.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 09:32:50 PM
 #437

It's dishonest to do so without disclosing such possibility. You've been told this numerous times but you keep omitting this part.

Nothing was stated about any kind of any reserve. According to USA auction standards, the standard is that there is a reserve. No auction rules were broken. Possibly only inconvenience and wasted time, and I've learned to not cause such again, so I've been stating the existence of reserve or no reserve since. All in all, disclosing such possibility is not required. Auction rules simply did not state anything about reserve, hidden or disclosed or no reserve.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 09:48:56 PM
Last edit: November 27, 2018, 10:04:56 PM by Anduck
 #438


Thank you for a good post. Appreciated.

I don't follow your logic here. If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better. Also regardless of this Vod abuse case.
Yeah no, that's a weird way of seeing things, but very prevalent. Why would you want to be on DT even, so that you could give Vod a taste of his own medicine? And then what? Honestly, you can just stop giving a fuck about the trust score of yours because it DOESN'T MATTER(FUN FACT!), and if you really are persistent on this, ignore vod from your trust lists, you could try persuading DT1 members to remove Vod but that is highly unlikely.

What's weird about "If DT exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, that's even better."? I can't choose if DT exists or not. If it exists, I should be on it. If it doesn't, I think it would be better for everybody. As it does exist now, I could maybe do something to make it better by being on it myself.

As said in earlier posts, I would want Vod to go back to "let's resolve this personal issue" mindset. He had that when he thought that I were on DT as well. I wouldn't care about my trust score very much, but I know it does affect my trading activity in here. It's just how it is, sadly. Not everyone can go and see the ratings.. Many (often new people) just dismiss users without deep green trust score, for certain things.

What exactly am I refusing to listen? I see DT merely as a list of people who are unlikely to scam others. Nothing more. What do I not see here?
DT is definitely not that type of lists.

It isn't right now, but that's what it should be and was made for.

The current situation is beyond ridiculous. DT1 members who have added Vod on DT2 are not acting about it, because 1) it's just one case 2) they're inactive 3) this case is too complex, takes a lot time to objectively comprehend what happened 4) they simply don't care.
Or... There's another possible and realistic reason and that is: Vod has given out so many ratings to people that are actually valid and rock solid, and removing him for one rating is just outright stupid. Removing Vod would only lead to more chaos than this. Vod shouldn't have done what he did about him asking you to remove his ratings, but he did it anyway, naivety happens, but he could try making up for it, its his wish. And by making I don't necessarily mean to remove the rating completely.

This case isn't complex, either people are way too stupid to understand(which they are) or they don't care enough.

What you described is my option #1. It's just one case, not worth enough to override good deeds of Vod. Removing him for one rating would be bad, yes.

This case is actually quite complex (at least to me even though I lived it.) It escalated way beyond what it should have. Vod blocked me and refuses all direct communications. I provoked him a bit by telling him that I don't necessarily see him as trustworthy.. Shouldn't have said that to him, right! Still not my fault that he abuses his position against me now. Basically his misunderstanding on top of his misunderstanding, and Vod not wanting to go back to that and understand his misunderstandings. Add a big ego and elevated position to this and you have a nice DT abuse case ready.

How is adding you to DT changing anything?

Would maybe make Vod think about his behavior and would maybe make him want to find a resolution, just like when he thought I was on DT. I assume this "will to seek for resolution" would happen as it happened when he thought I was on DT. Also I would obviously do what I can to portray DT as the list of people unlikely to scam, and nothing else.

SaltySpitoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 1994


Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 09:51:42 PM
Merited by OgNasty (1)
 #439

It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers?

When you place a bid, you are entering a legal contract to purchase an item at the price you have offered, . You can't enter a contract with yourself, so bids by yourself are void. It was a crime punished by execution in Rome (same as fractional reserve banking  Tongue ) Ebay is a good source for information regarding auction fraud actually. Bidding on your own auctions is called shill bidding, and is a felony in the US, and Europe.

Of course, until there is a court case that proves me otherwise, I'd say that auctions done informally in a thread on a forum are honor bound at best. I doubt someone here could successfully press charges against someone for shill bidding, however my point is that its not something you can just brush off as a no big deal type of thing.

Anduck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1463
Merit: 1055


quack


View Profile
November 27, 2018, 10:02:29 PM
 #440

It's not dishonesty or scamming for auctioneer to bid on an auction. Many people agree with me on this, including theymos. This is also very normal in auction houses in Finland. Are they all unethical scammers?

When you place a bid, you are entering a legal contract to purchase an item at the price you have offered, . You can't enter a contract with yourself, so bids by yourself are void. It was a crime punished by execution in Rome (same as fractional reserve banking  Tongue ) Ebay is a good source for information regarding auction fraud actually. Bidding on your own auctions is called shill bidding, and is a felony in the US, and Europe.

Of course, until there is a court case that proves me otherwise, I'd say that auctions done informally in a thread on a forum are honor bound at best. I doubt someone here could successfully press charges against someone for shill bidding, however my point is that its not something you can just brush off as a no big deal type of thing.

Shill bidding is bidding on the auction by using other people or accounts to drive the price up. Shill bidding is not the same as auctioneer bidding on the item. Ebay only talks about shill bidding, not self-bidding as self-bidding is not even possible on their platform. Shill bidding is a crime, yes, but self-bidding is not. Otherwise many auction houses in Europe would operate illegally.

Hope the difference between auctioneer bid and shill bid is now clarified. They're totally different things. First one is a type of concealed reserve price while the latter is dishonest activity to fake price up.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!