Here's the case in point: you put down "100 BTC" as the risked amount in the feedback.
Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
This is the crux of the issue with Thule's rant against Vod's feedback (or at least part of it). You'll notice that when I tag account sellers, I don't enter an amount for "risked
BTC" because that would imply that I was scammed for that amount or at least there was some sort of transaction with bitcoin at stake.
Thule entered 100
BTC as the amount at risk when he left me one of his 3 negs. There was absolutely no need for that, and anyone reading the feedback might actually think I scammed you for that amount--regardless of the text of your feedback. It was a wrong thing to do, and that's why Vod called you out on it.
I'm not going to keep argueing with people who have clearly no knowledge at all about law which they already proofed several times in the past.
How about you expand on that statement and just state that you're going to stop arguing with any people about this non-issue. It's obviously getting you nowhere, and I suspect people are tired of responding to you when this crap keeps going around in lunatic circles.
You are posting nonsense.How does it come it didn't bothered you and Vod for 10 months these 100 BTC you claim i say you scammed me ?
First of all its the risked amount and not scammed amount.Who doesn't say if i go your stupid thinking i may lose 100 BTC because of your false feedback and claims ?
Now show me where i have been pledged guilty of a crime that Vod called me openly a criminal.
But rest assured Vod will be able to explain his view to a judge.I'm pretty sure that judge will ask him if he smokes pot or something else if his conclusion is based on the trust feedback i gave you as no normal person could have such an conclusion based on the feedback i gave.
There is in the real world something called reasoning and no judge ever will accept the kind of thinking Vod is providing.
Its also funny how hard you insist that the amount of BTC is being the amount you scammed me even it only asks for risked BTC and not scammed BTC but deny the fact that when giving negativ trust you officaly
claim i scammed or tried to scam you "You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." claiming its based on trust and has nothing to do with scamming.
The judge will surely ask how its possible that other members will think you guys gave me that negativ trust feedback just to alert people when everyone who is checking it will see
"You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."
Also when the judge will check your profiles and see the massiv amount of people giving you negativ feedback for the same reason i freaked out and where you can provide no evidence than i can tell you it will be an easy game
