Negative rating from The Pharmacist

[Rambotnic]

Passing things off as correct when they are merely a lazy and reprehensible method that is sure to leave one wanting is worthy of negative trust if not a ban if you ask me.

This time I will let it slide if you send me your address and demonstrate to me personally that you are fit to continue training people in this art.

If not then I think most would agree perma ban is the only answer here.

I don't think I went off topic with "Google, here I come!" and you missed my point, if admin allows this kind of behavior we will see bunch of shitposters running around forum with various articles taken from X-sites pretending they want to be helpful but all they really are doing is begging for merit without begging part. Is there any other reason why anyone would post "trading" thread in "meta", where most merit sources are, copying bunch of 11 years old articles with "disclaimer" without quotation and link to sources?
Yeah, I guess we can go full blind and act that this is not true  

My opinion is this is copy/paste, and what TP said in second post.

edited 

I can't consider my guide as shit posting because there was no such guide on this forum, and it was combinated from guides which help a lot people to prevent scamming.
I don't pretend to be helpful i am helpful.
I will repeat once again myself about the merits,ranks and benefits.
If you care about them and 99% people around, i am from those 1% who don't give a fuck about any merits, any ranks or the things everyone "fight" around.
I did post my guide in two places because i didn't know where it will be seen by more people and be more helpful.
Not everyone here is fighting for merits and ranks buddy.

[nikkybtc]

Did i plagiarize from this forum ? I don't think so.

Did you plagiarize from somewhere else?

Why should i be banned ?

For blatant plagiarism.

How you can contact driving car with fast speed with helping people to not being scammed and use escrow ? :D:D:D

Actually, I compared ignoring traffic rules with ignoring forum rules.

Trusting you are doing great, please regarding the trust  comment on ico, please i commented base on my personal experience, please dont judge me wrong , I beg you with the name of your deity please kindly review your comment and rating .

Thanks 

@

marlboroza

[cryptohunter]

Passing things off as correct when they are merely a lazy and reprehensible method that is sure to leave one wanting is worthy of negative trust if not a ban if you ask me.

This time I will let it slide if you send me your address and demonstrate to me personally that you are fit to continue training people in this art.

If not then I think most would agree perma ban is the only answer here.

I don't think I went off topic with "Google, here I come!" and you missed my point, if admin allows this kind of behavior we will see bunch of shitposters running around forum with various articles taken from X-sites pretending they want to be helpful but all they really are doing is begging for merit without begging part. Is there any other reason why anyone would post "trading" thread in "meta", where most merit sources are, copying bunch of 11 years old articles with "disclaimer" without quotation and link to sources?
Yeah, I guess we can go full blind and act that this is not true  

My opinion is this is copy/paste, and what TP said in second post.

edited  

LOL nobody cares about merit here except a few back slapping circle jerkers in meta and some noob spammers and sock puppets trying to spam icos all over the place. The OP falls into neither of those classifications.

The best devs with the best minds who have helped many people don't even have much merit. The guy that helped new people the most is not even posting anymore due to issues with a group of backslappers.

Most of these super merit accounts have never done anything of real note here not ever. They have not ever been first to stand up up to a big scam that was backed by huge amounts of established members nor delivered ground breaking technology. Those are the two things I look for when going through post history. I don't actually think I can find one major thing they have ever accomplished here.

 Who the hell would hang around meta for the majority of their posts. Developing these tools to see who is the best this and that according to gamed back slapping board metrics. What a waste of time. That is merit begging. Get out there on the main boards and help people or get out there and stop scamming ico bots and puppets. Stand up to obviously corrupt and distribution methods are that easy to game for the scammers that keep pushing them out there.

When I see large meta scores (in general)  and analyse them these are people who I remember coming here saying all sorts of stupid shit. One of the highest meta people on here and I used to row all the time over a specific project he stuck up for it for years ...then recognised it as the scam it was later on.  Many of these high merit tools have a strange moral compass too. Wanting to ban some poor dude because he was not specific enough about the sources he already said he took the articles from various sources.

How can you agree with a statement I have already demonstrated is incorrect

Must I spell this out for you again in larger font. He did not claim the work was his own as TP stated he attributed it to other reliable sources ............therefore he is simply saying he compiled it for easy of use.

After having said all of that I looked at your post history and see you spend a lot of time weeding out scams. So I am not putting you in with some of the others. I just think you are provably wrong to suggest a ban for this guy.

There are those that will always suck up to those the consider to have more power even when it is obvious they are wrong. Don't be one of them it makes you appear like a cuck.

[Thule]

Passing things off as correct when they are merely a lazy and reprehensible method that is sure to leave one wanting is worthy of negative trust if not a ban if you ask me.

This time I will let it slide if you send me your address and demonstrate to me personally that you are fit to continue training people in this art.

If not then I think most would agree perma ban is the only answer here.

I don't think I went off topic with "Google, here I come!" and you missed my point, if admin allows this kind of behavior we will see bunch of shitposters running around forum with various articles taken from X-sites pretending they want to be helpful but all they really are doing is begging for merit without begging part. Is there any other reason why anyone would post "trading" thread in "meta", where most merit sources are, copying bunch of 11 years old articles with "disclaimer" without quotation and link to sources?
Yeah, I guess we can go full blind and act that this is not true  

My opinion is this is copy/paste, and what TP said in second post.

edited  

LOL nobody cares about merit here except a few back slapping circle jerkers in merit and some noob spammers and sock puppets trying to spam icos all over the place. The OP falls into neither of those classifications.

The best devs with the best minds who have helped many people don't even have much merit. The guy that helped new people the most is not even posting anymore due to issues with a group of backslappers.

Most of these super merit accounts have never done anything of real note here not ever. They have not ever been first to stand up up to a big scam that was backed by huge amounts of established members nor delivered ground breaking technology. Those are the two things I look for when going through post history. I don't actually think I can find one major thing they have ever accomplished here.

 Who the hell would hang around meta for the majority of their posts. Developing these tools to see who is the best this and that according to gamed back slapping board metrics. What a waste of time. That is merit begging. Get out there on the main boards and help people or get out there and stop scamming ico bots and puppets. Stand up to obviously corrupt and distribution methods are that easy to game for the scammers that keep pushing them out there.

When I see large meta scores (in general)  and analyse them these are people who I remember coming here saying all sorts of stupid shit. One of the highest meta people on here and I used to row all the time over a specific project he stuck up for it for years ...then recognised it as the scam it was later on.  Many of these high merit tools have a strange moral compass too. Wanting to ban some poor dude because he was not specific enough about the sources he already said he took the articles from various sources.

How can you agree with a statement I have already demonstrated is incorrect

Must I spell this out for you again in larger font. He did not claim the work was his own as TP stated he attributed it to other reliable sources ............therefore he is simply saying he compiled it for easy of use.

After having said all of that I looked at your post history and see you spend a lot of time weeding out scams. So I am not putting you in with some of the others. I just think you are provably wrong to suggest a ban for this guy.

There are those that will always suck up to those the consider to have more power even when it is obvious they are wrong. Don't be one of them it makes you appear like a cuck.

Even i very often disagree with cryptohunter and we also had often a dispute in the past i have to fully agree with him here.
Btw cryptohunter can be considered as a core member on bitcointalk who really contributed and not like some DT punks who have lost connection to the real world.

[cryptohunter]

Even i very often disagree with cryptohunter and we also had often a dispute in the past i have to fully agree with him here.
Btw cryptohunter can be considered as a core member on bitcointalk who really contributed and not like some DT punks who have lost connection to the real world.

Thanks for the kind words.

I am now looking at the trust ratings of various accounts.

TRUST really does need to be updated here because.

Red trust glowing next to your name where it says trade with caution - - btc risked? what about alt coin risked etc. This was obviously initially developed for traders to identify btc scammers years previously.

to many this would imply the person has actually scammed someone and they have lost financially as a direct result.

However, I was given negative trust rating because - - - I DID NOT FIGHT THE SCAM THAT SCAMMED HIM???  Now I know at one time I was fighting lots of scams but this is when there were not so many projects. No 1 person can fight every single scam.

Who left this neg??  A legend member??

The other turds leaving me negative are known and proven scammers because I tried to destroy their scams.

However DT trust members should have very strict and clear criteria for being able to leave negative trust and really things that do not effect people financially directly and deliberately should not get a trade with caution red mark.

They should get a have broken the board rules yellow score and for repeated flouting a temp ban then perma ban.

Some people on this board have turned into bullies actually over time. They were quite humble when they first came to this board.

It's okay to be heavy handed with full on scammers but with people that have displayed they are nice people generally helping others you can not be allowed to fuck them over hard for their first mistake. I'm not even sure in this guys case he has broken board rules. Are there strict guidelines for referencing available to follow. Is the url enough in all cases? what if that is suspect as the original source?

I would expect making it very clear these are not your own words is a good start as per the rules on here as far as I can see.





 

[cryptohunter]

Did i plagiarize from this forum ? I don't think so.

Did you plagiarize from somewhere else?

Why should i be banned ?

For blatant plagiarism.

How you can contact driving car with fast speed with helping people to not being scammed and use escrow ? :D:D:D

Actually, I compared ignoring traffic rules with ignoring forum rules.

Trusting you are doing great, please regarding the trust  comment on ico, please i commented base on my personal experience, please dont judge me wrong , I beg you with the name of your deity please kindly review your comment and rating .

Thanks 

@

marlboroza

LOL.... calm down this is just an internet forum. Everything will be okay. You sound near the edge.

If you believe you have a case then make a thread and have it examined.

If you have been unjustly treated then it can be reversed. However if under the microscope you are found to be a scammer in anyway then I think asking for review could result in more serious consequences.

Choose wisely.

[Rambotnic]

Still i like this negative rep to be removed from my profile because i did nothing else than trying to help the community with helpful information how to stay safe and use escrow.

[philipma1957]

3. Red trust tags should be for people who did something which will harm the community or other people.

You don't feel taking someone else's work without paying for it doesn't harm the community?  It makes other people less likely to create original content.

Could I look at the post.

If he said he pulled it from other sources it is not the same as plagiarizing it.

Yeah his form was less then perfect but it he said is was not his work and he used other sources it is more of a case of imperfect crediting and not plagerizing.

So does someone have the post?

Since he was tagged someone should have saved the evidence .

I would like to read what he said.

[Rambotnic]

3. Red trust tags should be for people who did something which will harm the community or other people.

You don't feel taking someone else's work without paying for it doesn't harm the community?  It makes other people less likely to create original content.

Could I look at the post.

If he said he pulled it from other sources it is not the same as plagiarizing it.

Yeah his form was less then perfect but it he said is was not his work and he used other sources it is more of a case of imperfect crediting and not plagerizing.

So does someone have the post?

Since he was tagged someone should have saved the evidence .

I would like to read what he said.

That was the post -> https://archive.st/archive/2018/11/bitcointalk.org/p3sv/bitcointalk.org/index.html

[Rambotnic]

Still waiting this to be resolved and my tag "trade with caution" to be removed.
I don't get the idea of that "trade with caution" tag of my profile?
People should trade with caution with me because i help them with guide how to stay safe and use escrow?
This is ridiculous...
Pharmacist, please, reconsider your decision and remove the negative feedback from my profile.

[Findingnemo]

Pharmacist, please, reconsider your decision and remove the negative feedback from my profile.

I don't think it is going to be removed until your account will be banned because TP's feedback on you looks much stronger about why he gave this to you.

Maybe those negative trust can be diluted when you have more positive feedbacks from DT members so better lock this thread now and continue to trade.

[Rambotnic]

Pharmacist, please, reconsider your decision and remove the negative feedback from my profile.

I don't think it is going to be removed until your account will be banned because TP's feedback on you looks much stronger about why he gave this to you.

Maybe those negative trust can be diluted when you have more positive feedbacks from DT members so better lock this thread now and continue to trade.

I'm not going to be banned. The reason is false and that's not plagiarism.
It's badly credited thread.
I clearly stated the guides its mixed and taken from different sources, i just didn't add which sources which i will in my next thread with same guide.
There is no "stronger" and "weak" feedback.
Everyone do mistakes, me, Pharmacist, you...
People should trade me with caution because i like to guide them thru safe trades and escrow ? Seems legit...
If that's the logic, everyone around who offer help, security and knowledge how to stay safe should be traded with caution!
That's huge crime to help and educate people about safety and secure trades!
Good will always win evil ! Truth will always win lies. No matter you, me or anyone is around... That's why we are all here and alive Because good and truth always win.

*Even if i get banned for that, if my guide helps even 1 person to prevent being scammed, my mission is completed

[Findingnemo]

Pharmacist, please, reconsider your decision and remove the negative feedback from my profile.

I don't think it is going to be removed until your account will be banned because TP's feedback on you looks much stronger about why he gave this to you.

Maybe those negative trust can be diluted when you have more positive feedbacks from DT members so better lock this thread now and continue to trade.

I'm not going to be banned. The reason is false and that's not plagiarism.
It's badly credited thread.
I clearly stated the guides its mixed and taken from different sources, i just didn't add which sources which i will in my next thread with same guide.
There is no "stronger" and "weak" feedback.
Everyone do mistakes, me, Pharmacist, you...
People should trade me with caution because i like to guide them thru safe trades and escrow ? Seems legit...
If that's the logic, everyone around who offer help, security and knowledge how to stay safe should be traded with caution!
That's huge crime to help and educate people about safety and secure trades!

Don't repeats those words again and again,if you copied from some other source as well it will be called as plagiarism too.

Yes,it is a huge crime to help others with other's article.

[Rambotnic]

Pharmacist, please, reconsider your decision and remove the negative feedback from my profile.

I don't think it is going to be removed until your account will be banned because TP's feedback on you looks much stronger about why he gave this to you.

Maybe those negative trust can be diluted when you have more positive feedbacks from DT members so better lock this thread now and continue to trade.

I'm not going to be banned. The reason is false and that's not plagiarism.
It's badly credited thread.
I clearly stated the guides its mixed and taken from different sources, i just didn't add which sources which i will in my next thread with same guide.
There is no "stronger" and "weak" feedback.
Everyone do mistakes, me, Pharmacist, you...
People should trade me with caution because i like to guide them thru safe trades and escrow ? Seems legit...
If that's the logic, everyone around who offer help, security and knowledge how to stay safe should be traded with caution!
That's huge crime to help and educate people about safety and secure trades!

Don't repeats those words again and again,if you copied from some other source as well it will be called as plagiarism too.

Yes,it is a huge crime to help others with other's article.

A lot more smart and educated people than you explained what and how this is not plagiarism and just badly credited thread.
Don't play smart, that's not for you
Watch your own business and let the grown people consider something you don't have anything to do with.
Useless people like you who don't give a shit and doing nothing for this community should bypass threads like my guide and this one.
You don't care to help people, and u never will

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Looks like the original thread Rambotnic posted that was the basis for the plagiarism report was deleted, because I can't view it anymore.  I'm assuming a mod deleted it, but I'm wondering why he wasn't banned for plagiarism.  I don't recall reading a post by a mod on this issue, and I'd like to know what the deal is.

Having said that, when I hand out red trust wrongly I usually get dissenting opinions by trusted members (DT or otherwise), and that's definitely not the case here.  Most of them saw what Rambotnic wrote as plagiarized content just like I did--and I wasn't even one of the people who reported it to the mods.  The feedback is completely justified IMO, though I'd still like to hear a mod's opinion on this.

[Rambotnic]

My guide can be seen here -> https://archive.st/archive/2018/11/bitcointalk.org/p3sv/bitcointalk.org/index.html
I have no power to edit this archived thread.
I clearly stated it was taken from few sources.
"I found few different sources that are legitimate and decided to share them with the community for safe trading."
I never had bad intentions and never wanted to harm anyone.
Actually it is impossible my guide to harm anyone.

If i was doing the wrong thing, i would agree with every single bad opinion.
But consider i just made a little mistake by not crediting full i don't have to be judged like that.
Consider i don't care about any merits,ranks and everything, people like you from DT should help me with information what im doing wrong to fix it, so i could be able to help people around with information without violating the rules.

[cryptohunter]

Looks like the original thread Rambotnic posted that was the basis for the plagiarism report was deleted, because I can't view it anymore.  I'm assuming a mod deleted it, but I'm wondering why he wasn't banned for plagiarism.  I don't recall reading a post by a mod on this issue, and I'd like to know what the deal is.

Having said that, when I hand out red trust wrongly I usually get dissenting opinions by trusted members (DT or otherwise), and that's definitely not the case here.  Most of them saw what Rambotnic wrote as plagiarized content just like I did--and I wasn't even one of the people who reported it to the mods.  The feedback is completely justified IMO, though I'd still like to hear a mod's opinion on this.

He clearly said at the top of his post

"I found few different sources that are legitimate and decided to share them with the community for safe trading."


So

1. are you saying that was not there when you looked at it

or

2. you are saying that it was there but still you believe he was trying to claim this work as his own?

I see no exact method of correctly referencing source in the rules.  Is it not enought to clearly say I found these guides on the net and provide them here for others to look at??

If you look at this post history he would appear to be very helpful to new traders over quite a long period.

Removing the red trust would seem the only fair thing to do.

There is no way that anyone would consider it fair he was going to get banned. That would be completely insane. There are  proven scammers on this board that are not banned and don't even have red trust.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I see no exact method of correctly referencing source in the rules.  Is it not enought to clearly say I found these guides on the net and provide them here for others to look at??

They way he did it was very clearly not enough.  If you were writing a paper for school and used information from an academic journal, for instance, do you think it'd be sufficient to say "I found this in a journal, here you go"?  Nope, and even though bitcointalk doesn't have guidelines on source citation, it should be obvious that you need to (at the very least) reference where you're quoting material from.  The best way to do it IMO is provide a link and put the quoted text inside a quote box just as if you were quoting a bitcointalk post. 

If you look at this post history he would appear to be very helpful to new traders over quite a long period.

I think your estimation of the helpfulness of his posts and your definition of "a long period" are vastly inflated.  He registered in March of this year and most of his posts are straight-up gibberish.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'd like to hear from staff.

[Rambotnic]

I would like to see that passion against the scammers which running ponzi schemes and illegal stuff around.
Just because i didn't credited them by the way you want to see it, that doesn't mean i didn't say its from few other sources.
If you want something to be done by some way, then tell theymos to make you admin, and make official bitcointalk rules because there is only un-official ones so far.
I see so many things which is not okay around and no one doing nothing about it.
I spend more than 12 hours reporting more than 200+ threads on the alt market with 96% accuracy and you telling me that i'm useless from the day i join this website?
Well actually i do help people, not only with reports, with questions to OP threads which was clearly scams and information by private messages, by i also suggest every single person to use escrow.
Once this is over, i will once again open the same guide but this time i will credit it by the way Staff tell me to do it.
I hope this time someone won't say "You are not allowed to advertise other forums" with the links to the guides.
Yes i am helpful to the community, without powers like yours for sure i'm less helpful than you but, if you using them like that, that makes it 1:0 for me.
With or without red tag i still help people around and doing trades.
Its just i don't feel comfortable to have "trade with caution" tag consider this "violation" has nothing to do with trades, and the "violation" it self show to people how to actually trade safety.
It makes no sense to make someone profile looks like he's scammer/bad person, consider im totally the inverse.
You just had more time on this forum to be more trusted than me.
But i have all the time to prove myself in future, and believe me, watching your attitude, and watching mine, i will surpass most people around.

[marlboroza]

Once this is over, i will once again open the same guide but this time i will credit it by the way Staff tell me to do it.

You could write it with your own words based on your experience instead using different sources. That would be great topic.
I will stick to my opinion that such topic's shouldn't be allowed for several reasons and also I would like to say that cryptohunter has good point. OP said content was taken from different sources, so maybe they really didn't know that they have to credit source.