[Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide [1st Feb 2016]

[Inaba]

Why should I not pick someone who is actively and prominently spreading false information?  The point is that anyone, no matter how highly or lowly regarded can game the system with ease.  Picking an abandoned account that can't defend itself would not prove the point.  Picking an account, in this case yours, that would vigorously defend itself and still end up with a shitcan rating illustrates how broken the system is.

So as COO of BFL, you preferred to incentivise your forum members to discredit me rather than spend that energy to improve your company and so improve your rating... I have 327 negative ratings thanks to you, does that make your happy?

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

[1714020818]

1714020818

[1714020818]

1714020818

[hdbuck]

Are we done yet?

Ethics?! mehehehehe

I added a trust rating to you dogie. ^^

[dogie]

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

You targeted me because I was maintaining an impartial resource which stated clearly that it was my personal interpretation and to be supplemented by a buyer's own research.

The -9 BFL category wasn't even required for the smear campaign, as I didn't want to make a bigger deal out of it or draw more attention to it should you be the target of any retaliation. You would have picked up OOF or OFL anyway and still be on 1 point regardless so it made no difference to your rating. In fact, I think you're equivalent rating has gone up quite considerably since you started your smear campaign - even ignoring the fact that you just went up more than any other company in the last adjustment.

Of course it matters, I earn my livelihood from relationships I develop - both current and new - from these forums. You saw a quick and dirty opportunity that might benefit yourself at my expense and you went for it even though you knew it would almost certainly damage my ability to do business.

[Inaba]

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

You targeted me because I was maintaining an impartial resource which stated clearly that it was my personal interpretation and to be supplemented by a buyer's own research. That's what the -9 BFL category was for, quite simply because I didn't want to make a bigger deal out of your smear campaign or draw more attention to it should you be the target of any retaliation.

You would have picked up OOF or OFL anyway and still be on 1 point regardless so it made no difference to your rating. In fact, I think you're equivalent rating has gone up quite considerably since you started your smear campaign - even ignoring the fact that you just went up more than any other company in the last adjustment.

Of course it matters, I earn my livelihood from relationships I develop - both current and new - from these forums. You saw a quick and dirty opportunity that might benefit yourself at my expense and you went for it even though you knew it would almost certainly damage my ability to do business.

You were not and are not maintaining an impartial resource.  I think everyone here agrees with that, but you. But you keep promoting it as such, thereby misleading anyone and everyone who has read it.  Do you even know what "impartial" means?  You can't have an impartial resource that is your "personal interpretation" those things are mutually exclusive.  Impartial means you base it only on facts, not your interpretation.   To further the farce, you even created an entire CATEGORY named BFL.  How on earth do you possibly maintain that it is impartial?  Do you even hear yourself?

Now, you made the claim that you "can't just rate someone a 1 because you don't like them" to someone else, and I pointed out that you are doing just that, among many other dishonest acts.  I've given you fact based examples of why your guide is flawed and you've responded with more "personal interpretation" devoid of any supporting documentation or evidence.  I also pointed out your inconsistent criteria that you establish and then throw away IN THE SAME POST, and yet you maintain that your guide is impartial?!  Are you serious?

Then if it matters, why don't you lobby Theymos to fix it?  If it works as intended, then the trust system should not so easily be gamed.  If it does not work as intended, it needs to be fixed.  Your livelyhood?  What about mine?  You saw a quick and dirty opportunity to jump on the BFL hate bandwagon to boost your guide to the trolls and you took it.  Now you're complaining about it happening to you?  Please.  Cry me a river.  Don't be so hypocritical.

[dogie]

You were not and are not maintaining an impartial resource.  I think everyone here agrees with that, but you. But you keep promoting it as such, thereby misleading anyone and everyone who has read it.  Do you even know what "impartial" means?  You can't have an impartial resource that is your "personal interpretation" those things are mutually exclusive.  Impartial means you base it only on facts, not your interpretation.   To further the farce, you even created an entire CATEGORY named BFL.  How on earth do you possibly maintain that it is impartial?  Do you even hear yourself?

Now, you made the claim that you "can't just rate someone a 1 because you don't like them" to someone else, and I pointed out that you are doing just that, among many other dishonest acts.  I've given you fact based examples of why your guide is flawed and you've responded with more "personal interpretation" devoid of any supporting documentation or evidence.  I also pointed out your inconsistent criteria that you establish and then throw away IN THE SAME POST, and yet you maintain that your guide is impartial?!  Are you serious?

Then if it matters, why don't you lobby Theymos to fix it?  If it works as intended, then the trust system should not so easily be gamed.  If it does not work as intended, it needs to be fixed.  Your livelyhood?  What about mine?  You saw a quick and dirty opportunity to jump on the BFL hate bandwagon to boost your guide to the trolls and you took it.  Now you're complaining about it happening to you?  Please.  Cry me a river.  Don't be so hypocritical.

Its impartial because I have no personal qualms with any company. You think I do, but that's your opinion, it does not make it a fact. The guide is my personal interpretation because I am not a computer and as such it is not possible for me to pull numbers from the cloud autonomously. Therefore, this guide is my impartial interpretation.

There is no category named BFL. There is a result tier named BFL, which BFL was promoted out of. And as explained earlier it is not a rating criteria but the RESULT of the rating. Such that an unhygienic takeaway is labelled as F, not any 'F's are unhygienic by virtue of being 'F's. Its also a coloquial term for a less than perfect transaction.

You're trying to misquote and twist what I'm saying, again again. I've shorted what would be many, many, many ethical infractions which would put you far into negative points, into three letters because that's all that fits at this resolution and with what I can do with BBCODE formatting and 33,000 characters per post.

I gain nothing, NOTHING by your buyers being unhappy and I would love nothing more than for monarch to have come out in December and everyone to have been happy. You'd have made (more) money, buyers would have ROI'ed nicely, you wouldn't have had to do the PCB revisions, blah blah blah. Could have probably taped out the next gen and been selling in hand by now or something. And I'd have been happy for you, because again it does not benefit me what so ever for your customers to be unhappy.

Why would it, how could it possibly by so? Are you suggesting I somehow gain traffic by artificially lowering BFL's rating in this thread? Are you suggesting that for the 8 months this resource had no ads in, that increased niche of 'BFL circlejerk troll' traffic somehow made me money?

The trust system works as long as companies don't pay people to discredit those they see as opponents as you did. You're essentially saying 'you did it to me so I did it to you', right?

[Inaba]

Why would it, how could it possibly by so? Are you suggesting I somehow gain traffic by artificially lowering BFL's rating in this thread? Are you suggesting that for the 8 months this resource had no ads in, that increased niche of 'BFL circlejerk troll' traffic somehow made me money?

I cut out the rest of our diatribe because it's pointless to argue with you.  You won't admit, even though everyone else here agrees, that your guide is biased, if for no other reason than you made a category... I mean a "tier" named BFL. There's nothing biased about that, oh no.

That said, you absolutely, positively did gain traction on your guide by bashing BFL.  If you had been honest and impartial in your guide, BFL would be rated higher and you'd have all the trolls bitching and moaning and whining and making you out to be the devil and your guide would have gone exactly nowhere. You banked on the hate train and gained your dubious reputation directly off the back of BFL. So yes, absolutely you gained traffic by artifically lowering BFLs rating.  That is painfully obvious.  It's not about making money (or lack thereof) it's about gaining traffic and mindshare.  You know this, you're just being hyperbolic... again.

The trust system works as long as companies don't pay people to discredit those they see as opponents as you did. You're essentially saying 'you did it to me so I did it to you', right?

If someone can pay others to game the system, then the system DOESN'T WORK.  Dude, are you this oblivious to your contradictions in real life or do you just not read what you write after you write it?  I can only imagine what actually talking to you face to face is like, it must be an absolutely mindblowing experience.

[Gleb Gamow]

Ohhh ChuckBuck... I mean Bicknellski.  Did you post with the wrong account?  Oopsie! lol

Quick, pull a Garr255 and delete it and pretend it wasn't you, then accuse ME of having sock puppets!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)

A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock, originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person.[1] The term now includes other misleading uses of online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a person or organization,[2] or to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym[3] and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer. Many online communities attempt to block sockpuppets.

http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMining/comments/21ev00/great_but_pricey_cloud_mining_service_you_can/cgctgq8

Yes, but you have to have a place to store it, operate it and maintain it as well as pay for power. Not saying $25/GH is a great deal, but you can't compare owning the hardware and operating it yourself to a cloud mining service like Nimbus Mining, since they are two entirely different things. The only thing that's the same about them is that you are hashing... otherwise, Nimbus Mining is infinitely more convenient and easy to use, but you pay for that convenience. Maybe the price will come down soon, who knows.

http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMining/comments/21ev00/great_but_pricey_cloud_mining_service_you_can/cgcwhdt

No, nor will you make the costs of the miner back from mining, so what is your point? You will lose either way. If I just had to mine, for whatever reason, my time is far more valuable than $25/yr per GH, so it would make more sense for me to use a cloud mining service. Fortunately, I do not have any burning need to mine, so I will not be purchasing a cloud mining contract.

Taking on the responsibility of the hardware yourself is great for people with no life/job/family/hobbies/etc... but for those people who have other things to do than to maintain a mining farm, it might make sense. Again, this is all predicated on the fact that one must mine no matter what. Who this hypothetical person is, I have no idea, but it's certainly not me.

In the latter bold text, at the time it was penned, it was left to the reading's imagination as to why you had no burning desire to mine nor purchase a cloud mining contract.

I can easily site at least two instances where your nitrowolf account on Reddit was asked if you belonged to camp BFL, with both questions ignored. Until I uncovered who nitrowolf was, nobody had a clue it was you, Josh Zerlan, while you all the while defended BFL in every post you penned pertaining to said.

[TracerX]

[Gleb Gamow]

You're the one that is complaining. You want a higher score in that category than you're entitled to at this point, or any other company gets. Ship more, be patient, receive a higher score for this generation.

I'm pointing out your hypocricy and duplicity.  If you call that complaining, so be it.  I don't really care what you rate BFL on the guide, but please don't mislead newbies and everyone one else by stating that your guide is unbiased and true.  There's nothing unbiased or true about it.  It's all how you feel about the subject and damn the facts.  You complain that BFL misleads people and here you are doing it.  Practice what you preach.

There was 290,000 members on the forums at the time. You chose Theymos as one. Why was I chosen as one of the other two? Why was it 'convenient' that I was chosen to be bombarded with negative trust out of all those possibilities? You could have chosen abandoned accounts, your own accounts or accounts you'd made purposely for the 'experiment' as you called it. Instead, you chose me. Why?

Why should I not pick someone who is actively and prominently spreading false information?  The point is that anyone, no matter how highly or lowly regarded can game the system with ease.  Picking an abandoned account that can't defend itself would not prove the point.  Picking an account, in this case yours, that would vigorously defend itself and still end up with a shitcan rating illustrates how broken the system is.  Or how unbroken it is, perhaps.  At least according to Theymos.  I am sure you, Bickfailski and I disagree, though.

In bold can easily be contributed to all bitcoin miner manufactures, all of which are gaming the system to their advantage to one extreme or another. Unless, that is, BFL is above that, and there's not one iota nefarious activity stemming from their camp. Ironically, this thread directly and indirectly dictates otherwise.

Is it safe to assume that a next gen BFL product is about to introduced for pre-orders, hence your recent presence to grace us monumental assholes?

[Gleb Gamow]

Why should I not pick someone who is actively and prominently spreading false information?  The point is that anyone, no matter how highly or lowly regarded can game the system with ease.  Picking an abandoned account that can't defend itself would not prove the point.  Picking an account, in this case yours, that would vigorously defend itself and still end up with a shitcan rating illustrates how broken the system is.

So as COO of BFL, you preferred to incentivise your forum members to discredit me rather than spend that energy to improve your company and so improve your rating... I have 327 negative ratings thanks to you, does that make your happy?

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

Ergo, the rating system shouldn't matter one iota since BFL will no longer be accepting pre-orders and their entity is "on a good track now, trying to put the past behind."

[Gleb Gamow]

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

You targeted me because I was maintaining an impartial resource which stated clearly that it was my personal interpretation and to be supplemented by a buyer's own research. That's what the -9 BFL category was for, quite simply because I didn't want to make a bigger deal out of your smear campaign or draw more attention to it should you be the target of any retaliation.

You would have picked up OOF or OFL anyway and still be on 1 point regardless so it made no difference to your rating. In fact, I think you're equivalent rating has gone up quite considerably since you started your smear campaign - even ignoring the fact that you just went up more than any other company in the last adjustment.

Of course it matters, I earn my livelihood from relationships I develop - both current and new - from these forums. You saw a quick and dirty opportunity that might benefit yourself at my expense and you went for it even though you knew it would almost certainly damage my ability to do business.

You were not and are not maintaining an impartial resource.  I think everyone here agrees with that, but you. But you keep promoting it as such, thereby misleading anyone and everyone who has read it.  Do you even know what "impartial" means?  You can't have an impartial resource that is your "personal interpretation" those things are mutually exclusive.  Impartial means you base it only on facts, not your interpretation.   To further the farce, you even created an entire CATEGORY named BFL.  How on earth do you possibly maintain that it is impartial?  Do you even hear yourself?

Now, you made the claim that you "can't just rate someone a 1 because you don't like them" to someone else, and I pointed out that you are doing just that, among many other dishonest acts.  I've given you fact based examples of why your guide is flawed and you've responded with more "personal interpretation" devoid of any supporting documentation or evidence.  I also pointed out your inconsistent criteria that you establish and then throw away IN THE SAME POST, and yet you maintain that your guide is impartial?!  Are you serious?

Then if it matters, why don't you lobby Theymos to fix it?  If it works as intended, then the trust system should not so easily be gamed.  If it does not work as intended, it needs to be fixed.  Your livelyhood?  What about mine?  You saw a quick and dirty opportunity to jump on the BFL hate bandwagon to boost your guide to the trolls and you took it.  Now you're complaining about it happening to you?  Please.  Cry me a river.  Don't be so hypocritical.

Hey, dogie, when are you going to invite me over to your half million dollar home fully paid for with bitcoins from your personal account for dinner to discuss over eats how Josh sold EMC to BFL, but lead ALL its customers that he, alone, was the sole proprietor until it was realized he hadn't been since at least Q4, 2012, thanks to a press release depicting Sonny's probation, et al., via court documents?

[dogie]

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

You targeted me because I was maintaining an impartial resource which stated clearly that it was my personal interpretation and to be supplemented by a buyer's own research. That's what the -9 BFL category was for, quite simply because I didn't want to make a bigger deal out of your smear campaign or draw more attention to it should you be the target of any retaliation.

You would have picked up OOF or OFL anyway and still be on 1 point regardless so it made no difference to your rating. In fact, I think you're equivalent rating has gone up quite considerably since you started your smear campaign - even ignoring the fact that you just went up more than any other company in the last adjustment.

Of course it matters, I earn my livelihood from relationships I develop - both current and new - from these forums. You saw a quick and dirty opportunity that might benefit yourself at my expense and you went for it even though you knew it would almost certainly damage my ability to do business.

You were not and are not maintaining an impartial resource.  I think everyone here agrees with that, but you. But you keep promoting it as such, thereby misleading anyone and everyone who has read it.  Do you even know what "impartial" means?  You can't have an impartial resource that is your "personal interpretation" those things are mutually exclusive.  Impartial means you base it only on facts, not your interpretation.   To further the farce, you even created an entire CATEGORY named BFL.  How on earth do you possibly maintain that it is impartial?  Do you even hear yourself?

Now, you made the claim that you "can't just rate someone a 1 because you don't like them" to someone else, and I pointed out that you are doing just that, among many other dishonest acts.  I've given you fact based examples of why your guide is flawed and you've responded with more "personal interpretation" devoid of any supporting documentation or evidence.  I also pointed out your inconsistent criteria that you establish and then throw away IN THE SAME POST, and yet you maintain that your guide is impartial?!  Are you serious?

Then if it matters, why don't you lobby Theymos to fix it?  If it works as intended, then the trust system should not so easily be gamed.  If it does not work as intended, it needs to be fixed.  Your livelyhood?  What about mine?  You saw a quick and dirty opportunity to jump on the BFL hate bandwagon to boost your guide to the trolls and you took it.  Now you're complaining about it happening to you?  Please.  Cry me a river.  Don't be so hypocritical.

Hey, dogie, when are you going to invite me over to your half million dollar home fully paid for with bitcoins from your personal account for dinner to discuss over eats how Josh sold EMC to BFL, but lead ALL its customers that he, alone, was the sole proprietor until it was realized he hadn't been since at least Q4, 2012, thanks to a press release depicting Sonny's probation, et al., via court documents?

[I'm confused, have you crossed names in this post?]

[Gleb Gamow]

Yes, because the "energy" was so tremendous.  It took all of about 20 minutes.  Nice strawman.

As for your negative ratings, do you agree that the trust system is broken?  Then if so, your rating doesn't matter.
If you do not agree, then the rating system is working as intended and your rating is just.

In either case, it doesn't matter.  But to answer your flawed conclusion... let me ask you this.  How many people have seen your biased guide containing all manner of false information?  More than 327 I would imagine. So I use you as an example to show a flawed system and you in turn post false information and mislead many more people with your guide.  You probably shouldn't talk about ethics.

You targeted me because I was maintaining an impartial resource which stated clearly that it was my personal interpretation and to be supplemented by a buyer's own research. That's what the -9 BFL category was for, quite simply because I didn't want to make a bigger deal out of your smear campaign or draw more attention to it should you be the target of any retaliation.

You would have picked up OOF or OFL anyway and still be on 1 point regardless so it made no difference to your rating. In fact, I think you're equivalent rating has gone up quite considerably since you started your smear campaign - even ignoring the fact that you just went up more than any other company in the last adjustment.

Of course it matters, I earn my livelihood from relationships I develop - both current and new - from these forums. You saw a quick and dirty opportunity that might benefit yourself at my expense and you went for it even though you knew it would almost certainly damage my ability to do business.

You were not and are not maintaining an impartial resource.  I think everyone here agrees with that, but you. But you keep promoting it as such, thereby misleading anyone and everyone who has read it.  Do you even know what "impartial" means?  You can't have an impartial resource that is your "personal interpretation" those things are mutually exclusive.  Impartial means you base it only on facts, not your interpretation.   To further the farce, you even created an entire CATEGORY named BFL.  How on earth do you possibly maintain that it is impartial?  Do you even hear yourself?

Now, you made the claim that you "can't just rate someone a 1 because you don't like them" to someone else, and I pointed out that you are doing just that, among many other dishonest acts.  I've given you fact based examples of why your guide is flawed and you've responded with more "personal interpretation" devoid of any supporting documentation or evidence.  I also pointed out your inconsistent criteria that you establish and then throw away IN THE SAME POST, and yet you maintain that your guide is impartial?!  Are you serious?

Then if it matters, why don't you lobby Theymos to fix it?  If it works as intended, then the trust system should not so easily be gamed.  If it does not work as intended, it needs to be fixed.  Your livelyhood?  What about mine?  You saw a quick and dirty opportunity to jump on the BFL hate bandwagon to boost your guide to the trolls and you took it.  Now you're complaining about it happening to you?  Please.  Cry me a river.  Don't be so hypocritical.

Hey, dogie, when are you going to invite me over to your half million dollar home fully paid for with bitcoins from your personal account for dinner to discuss over eats how Josh sold EMC to BFL, but lead ALL its customers that he, alone, was the sole proprietor until it was realized he hadn't been since at least Q4, 2012, thanks to a press release depicting Sonny's probation, et al., via court documents?

[I'm confused, have you crossed names in this post?]

No I did not. Josh expressed concerns about his livelihood, and I turned it around using his recently purchased home via bitcoins, assuming your livelihood is not as good as his.

All four of CoinWares sister companies have tens of millions of Monarchs on order, none of which worried one iota about this thread, ergo Josh's livelihood is not in danger of being disrupted.

[dogie]

Why would it, how could it possibly by so? Are you suggesting I somehow gain traffic by artificially lowering BFL's rating in this thread? Are you suggesting that for the 8 months this resource had no ads in, that increased niche of 'BFL circlejerk troll' traffic somehow made me money?

I cut out the rest of our diatribe because it's pointless to argue with you.  You won't admit, even though everyone else here agrees, that your guide is biased, if for no other reason than you made a category... I mean a "tier" named BFL. There's nothing biased about that, oh no.

That said, you absolutely, positively did gain traction on your guide by bashing BFL.  If you had been honest and impartial in your guide, BFL would be rated higher and you'd have all the trolls bitching and moaning and whining and making you out to be the devil and your guide would have gone exactly nowhere. You banked on the hate train and gained your dubious reputation directly off the back of BFL. So yes, absolutely you gained traffic by artifically lowering BFLs rating.  That is painfully obvious.  It's not about making money (or lack thereof) it's about gaining traffic and mindshare.  You know this, you're just being hyperbolic... again.

Watch, the name of that score level changed. Oh look, nothing else changed! Ah yes, because its an effect and not a cause. Its just a descriptor nothing to do with setting the actual rating as I've explained.

You're saying I gained traffic by artificially setting BFL low in order to placate 'BFL trolls' and prevent them flooding the thread. But if I set BFL higher, then the guide would have been flooded with posts about how BFL was too high, creating more traffic. You just blew my mind. ......... Anyway, lets pretend for a second that your logic wasn't totally fucked, lets look at the traffic numbers. Lets pretend for a second that by some witchcraft your voodoo logic means my traffic increased by 5%. This guide's views make up less than 5% of my views on the forums. So I gained 0.25% readership or 1,487 views over 7 months, hurrah!

The trust system works as long as companies don't pay people to discredit those they see as opponents as you did. You're essentially saying 'you did it to me so I did it to you', right?

If someone can pay others to game the system, then the system DOESN'T WORK.  Dude, are you this oblivious to your contradictions in real life or do you just not read what you write after you write it?  I can only imagine what actually talking to you face to face is like, it must be an absolutely mindblowing experience.

Saying the system is flawed doesn't work when it requires breaking the law to induce 'breaking' it. Its only because you work for a huge company that you know no one can do anything about it. At least give me the decency of confirming the real motive behind the competition...

1) You chose me as a target of the competition/experiment because it was beneficial to BFL to have me discredited/because you believed I was spreading false information about BFL.
2) You hoped/believed that users would tarnish my trust rating such that others would be less willing to listen to me.
3) You hoped/believed it would damage my reputation/discredit me from doing business in the future.
4) You hoped/believed it would damage my income.
5) You hoped/believed that I would stop producing content and your business would increase.

That's right isn't it Josh?

[dogie]

No I did not. Josh expressed concerns about his livelihood, and I turned it around using his recently purchased home via bitcoins, assuming your livelihood is not as good as his.

All four of CoinWares sister companies have tens of millions of Monarchs on order, none of which worried one iota about this thread, ergo Josh's livelihood is not in danger of being disrupted.

[Inaba]

Watch, the name of that score level changed. Oh look, nothing else changed! Ah yes, because its an effect and not a cause. Its just a descriptor nothing to do with setting the actual rating as I've explained.

You're saying I gained traffic by artificially setting BFL low in order to placate 'BFL trolls' and prevent them flooding the thread. But if I set BFL higher, then the guide would have been flooded with posts about how BFL was too high, creating more traffic. You just blew my mind. ......... Anyway, lets pretend for a second that your logic wasn't totally fucked, lets look at the traffic numbers. Lets pretend for a second that by some witchcraft your voodoo logic means my traffic increased by 5%. This guide's views make up less than 5% of my views on the forums. So I gained 0.25% readership or 1,487 views over 7 months, hurrah!

So what if it's just a descriptor?  It proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are biased.  If you were unbiased, you would not use a descriptor that is a company name to indicate the worst possible condition. That is the very definition of biased.

Yes, I am saying you gained traffic by artifically setting BFL low in order to placate the trolls.  That is exactly right.  I am glad you admit that if you set BFL higher, if you based your guide on facts and were honest, you'd be flooded by how BFL is too high.  It wouldn't generate more traffic, it would send you to the dustbin and you know it.  If you were not seen as jumping on the BFL hate train and actually using facts and evidence to support your conclusions, you'd be a pariah and nobody would use your guide, because all the trolls would say what an idiot Dogie is and what a worthless shill you are.  I'm not saying your hate train fueled guide increased your traffic, I'm saying it prevented you from losing traffic and allowed you to gain marketshare directly at BFLs expense. This is indisputable and you even admit so much in this post.  I seriously doubt anyone here would disagree with the fact that if BFL were rated higher, you'd have the trolls yowling at you about how you're a shill and your guide is worthless.  Do you deny this?

Anyone, and I mean anyone who says anything positive about BFL on these forums is instantly labeled a shill.  Go on, tell me that is false.

1) Beneficial to BFL?  Hardly. How is it beneficial to BFL?
2) Tarnish your trust rating so people would be unwilling to listen to you?  Absolutely, what is more appropriate than using the trust system to show you are untrustworthy and continually lie to your reader base?
3) I wasn't aware you were doing a business.  You said yourself you didn't earn anything off of the guide, so what business would it affect? Or did you just slip up and commit yet another lie?
4) You said you wern't earning any income, so how could this be? Uh oh... yet another contradiction.
5) Not at all, are you just making stuff up now?  I had no doubt you would continue to publish your false, biased information under the guise of "unbiased, factual information," I just wanted to make sure people knew that you were doing so.

[Gleb Gamow]

Watch, the name of that score level changed. Oh look, nothing else changed! Ah yes, because its an effect and not a cause. Its just a descriptor nothing to do with setting the actual rating as I've explained.

You're saying I gained traffic by artificially setting BFL low in order to placate 'BFL trolls' and prevent them flooding the thread. But if I set BFL higher, then the guide would have been flooded with posts about how BFL was too high, creating more traffic. You just blew my mind. ......... Anyway, lets pretend for a second that your logic wasn't totally fucked, lets look at the traffic numbers. Lets pretend for a second that by some witchcraft your voodoo logic means my traffic increased by 5%. This guide's views make up less than 5% of my views on the forums. So I gained 0.25% readership or 1,487 views over 7 months, hurrah!

So what if it's just a descriptor?  It proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are biased.  If you were unbiased, you would not use a descriptor that is a company name to indicate the worst possible condition. That is the very definition of biased.

Yes, I am saying you gained traffic by artifically setting BFL low in order to placate the trolls.  That is exactly right.  I am glad you admit that if you set BFL higher, if you based your guide on facts and were honest, you'd be flooded by how BFL is too high.  It wouldn't generate more traffic, it would send you to the dustbin and you know it.  If you were not seen as jumping on the BFL hate train and actually using facts and evidence to support your conclusions, you'd be a pariah and nobody would use your guide, because all the trolls would say what an idiot Dogie is and what a worthless shill you are.  I'm not saying your hate train fueled guide increased your traffic, I'm saying it prevented you from losing traffic and allowed you to gain marketshare directly at BFLs expense. This is indisputable and you even admit so much in this post.  I seriously doubt anyone here would disagree with the fact that if BFL were rated higher, you'd have the trolls yowling at you about how you're a shill and your guide is worthless.  Do you deny this?

Anyone, and I mean anyone who says anything positive about BFL on these forums is instantly labeled a shill.  Go on, tell me that is false.

1) Beneficial to BFL?  Hardly. How is it beneficial to BFL?
2) Tarnish your trust rating so people would be unwilling to listen to you?  Absolutely, what is more appropriate than using the trust system to show you are untrustworthy and continually lie to your reader base?
3) I wasn't aware you were doing a business.  You said yourself you didn't earn anything off of the guide, so what business would it affect? Or did you just slip up and commit yet another lie?
4) You said you wern't earning any income, so how could this be? Uh oh... yet another contradiction.
5) Not at all, are you just making stuff up now?  I had no doubt you would continue to publish your false, biased information under the guise of "unbiased, factual information," I just wanted to make sure people knew that you were doing so.

[dogie]

So what if it's just a descriptor?  It proves, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that you are biased.  If you were unbiased, you would not use a descriptor that is a company name to indicate the worst possible condition. That is the very definition of biased.

Yes, I am saying you gained traffic by artifically setting BFL low in order to placate the trolls.  That is exactly right.  I am glad you admit that if you set BFL higher, if you based your guide on facts and were honest, you'd be flooded by how BFL is too high.  It wouldn't generate more traffic, it would send you to the dustbin and you know it.  If you were not seen as jumping on the BFL hate train and actually using facts and evidence to support your conclusions, you'd be a pariah and nobody would use your guide, because all the trolls would say what an idiot Dogie is and what a worthless shill you are.  I'm not saying your hate train fueled guide increased your traffic, I'm saying it prevented you from losing traffic and allowed you to gain marketshare directly at BFLs expense. This is indisputable and you even admit so much in this post.  I seriously doubt anyone here would disagree with the fact that if BFL were rated higher, you'd have the trolls yowling at you about how you're a shill and your guide is worthless.  Do you deny this?

Anyone, and I mean anyone who says anything positive about BFL on these forums is instantly labeled a shill.  Go on, tell me that is false.

1) Beneficial to BFL?  Hardly. How is it beneficial to BFL?
2) Tarnish your trust rating so people would be unwilling to listen to you?  Absolutely, what is more appropriate than using the trust system to show you are untrustworthy and continually lie to your reader base?
3) I wasn't aware you were doing a business.  You said yourself you didn't earn anything off of the guide, so what business would it affect? Or did you just slip up and commit yet another lie?
4) You said you wern't earning any income, so how could this be? Uh oh... yet another contradiction.
5) Not at all, are you just making stuff up now?  I had no doubt you would continue to publish your false, biased information under the guise of "unbiased, factual information," I just wanted to make sure people knew that you were doing so.

The tier above was described as "significant issues or problems". If I was to add a descriptor to the tier in questions, you would complain far stronger as it would probably have to include something along the lines of "avoid this company" strength recommendation. As you were the only active company in that tier, it only made sense to name it the BFL tier and avoid a harsh descriptor. That gave the buyer the most opportunity to form their own opinion and do their own research.

I did not admit anything. You're turning a double-ended, impossible hypothetical situation into a quote - AGAIN. Even when we go with your scenario, where are the BFL haters when I raise your score by 38% in one round? According to you I should be getting lynched and discredited by the shills by now [which by the way I'm not saying don't exist, there do seem to be very dedicated people against your cause]. The core community has other companies to satisfy their appetite and doesn't particularly care for BFL. And yes, I deny everything you're accusing me of.

1) You've said several times that I'm spreading lies about BFL, why would removing me not fit that motive?
2) Thanks for confirming this.
3 & 4) Setup guides have affiliate links to amazon in for PSUs etc and there is publicly auctioned advertising. I also traded 2nd hardware which is done solely on trust, that's how I live. I don't see any contradiction, and you know god damn that I work here for a living. This particular trustworthiness guide is something that I do for the community for pretty much free though.
5) Okay thats fair, I guess a lot of people have vendettas against you that they follow regardless of any particular logic or apparent motive.

[tnkflx]

@Inaba

You do realize that none of what you're posting here is helping your company (or cause) right? Instead of trying to improve the public image of BFL, you're only strengthening (in my case) the negative view I already have of you and BFL. You're asking Dogie for proof, but you're not providing any yourself that things are better/different now.

[pmorici]

@dogie have you ever heard of the ASIC company Hashra?  They are supposedly based in the UK and offering almost too good to be true ASIC prices and are taking what look like pre-orders.  Thoughts?  can you add them to your guide.