Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2019, 12:55:53 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DefaultTrust changes  (Read 55882 times)
tranthidung
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 658
Merit: 948


☀️ Campaign manager ☀


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2019, 06:44:30 AM
 #1081

Merit circulations before and after the Default Trust Change (09/01/2019)
I compared statistics (median, and mean) of after period (two weeks later 09/01/2019, three weeks later 09/01/2019) to the before period.

It is probably that the change of Default Trust forced new topics published, more informative, constructive dicussions, and - of course - more good posts occured days before the change.
As we always known that, sMerits are not scarce, good posts are.
Consequently, it is probably that the change of Default Trust somehow increased the amount of good posts which led to higher merit circulations days after the change.
It is clear with statistics for 2 weeks later, but the effects likely blurred for 3 weeks later.

Detail statistics are there:
Two weeks later
- Median: +31.8%
- Mean: +23.2%

Three weeks later
- Median: + 15.9%
- Mean: + 15.5%

Notes:
- Few days before Default Trust change, 3 more merit sources added, and airdropped merits to merit sources re-allocated. They are potential bias on the merit circulations in after period (2, 3 weeks later).




▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄                  ▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄        ▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
 ▀████████████████▄  ████                 █████   ▀████▄    ▄████▀  ▄██████████████   ████████████▀  ▄█████████████▀  ▄█████████████▄
              ▀████  ████               ▄███▀███▄   ▀████▄▄████▀               ████   ████                ████                   ▀████
   ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█████  ████              ████   ████    ▀██████▀      ██████████████▄   ████████████▀       ████       ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████▀
   ██████████████▀   ████            ▄███▀     ▀███▄    ████        ████        ████  ████                ████       ██████████████▀
   ████              ████████████▀  ████   ██████████   ████        ████████████████  █████████████▀      ████       ████      ▀████▄
   ▀▀▀▀              ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀  ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀       ▀▀▀▀        ▀▀▀▀▀

#1 CRYPTO CASINO & SPORTSBOOK
  WELCOME
BONUS
.INSTANT & FAST.
.TRANSACTION.....
.PROVABLY FAIR.
......& SECURE......
.24/7 CUSTOMER.
............SUPPORT.
BTC      |      ETH      |      LTC      |      XRP      |      XMR      |      BNB      |     more
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1575636953
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1575636953

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1575636953
Reply with quote  #2

1575636953
Report to moderator
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2488


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 08:13:13 AM
 #1082



This is completely the opposite for what DT was designed for.

DT can not red trust people for telling the truth and encouraging others to view the evidence to support their claim. The very notion of using red trust this way is disgraceful and although I can tell you have a good mind for presenting a case for anything there is no way for this to be justified.

I would hear your thoughts on the entire matter. This is not at all the same circumstances and accomplishment as your example.

"Absolutely not", is not applicable in this specific case. Unless you agree with the actions of this person.

This is not a grey area like accounts being sold this is totally wrong and against the very principles that DT is supposed to represent.

I know you don't care but you're incorrect in your assumptions about what Trust is to be used for. Trust can be given out for any reason a user sees fit, though theymos discourages leaving ratings based on post quality:

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

Any arguments people make about what Trust is supposed to be used for should reference this list first as it is from the OP of when the Trust system was first introduced.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1560


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2019, 09:55:23 AM
 #1083



This is completely the opposite for what DT was designed for.

DT can not red trust people for telling the truth and encouraging others to view the evidence to support their claim. The very notion of using red trust this way is disgraceful and although I can tell you have a good mind for presenting a case for anything there is no way for this to be justified.

I would hear your thoughts on the entire matter. This is not at all the same circumstances and accomplishment as your example.

"Absolutely not", is not applicable in this specific case. Unless you agree with the actions of this person.

This is not a grey area like accounts being sold this is totally wrong and against the very principles that DT is supposed to represent.

I know you don't care but you're incorrect in your assumptions about what Trust is to be used for. Trust can be given out for any reason a user sees fit, though theymos discourages leaving ratings based on post quality:

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

Any arguments people make about what Trust is supposed to be used for should reference this list first as it is from the OP of when the Trust system was first introduced.

TL;DR   

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.



██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2488


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 10:33:25 AM
 #1084

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.

Good, glad to see that we can agree on something, and that the system was initially intended to be highly flexible and open to interpretation -- not nailed down to what a few members believed it should be used for.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1560


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2019, 10:58:59 AM
 #1085

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.

Good, glad to see that we can agree on something, and that the system was initially intended to be highly flexible and open to interpretation -- not nailed down to what a few members believed it should be used for.

Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2488


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 11:17:22 AM
 #1086

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.

Good, glad to see that we can agree on something, and that the system was initially intended to be highly flexible and open to interpretation -- not nailed down to what a few members believed it should be used for.

Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?

Dude. I'm pointing out that the system was initially designed to be open to interpretation. You're saying it needs to be changed. OK, so changed to _what_ exactly, and on _who's_ authority? You've probably stated your case a hundred times, and nobody cares. Its because you want it changed to what _you_ want. You're like a child who throws a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
ScumBuster
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 9


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 11:19:21 AM
Merited by nutildah (1)
 #1087

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.
Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?

>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2488


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 11:21:26 AM
 #1088

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.
Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?

>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument

LOL. I was just about to point that out.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
Lauda
GrumpyKitty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 2226


Exchange Bitcoin quickly-https://blockchain.com.do


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 11:23:44 AM
 #1089

>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument

Dude. I'm pointing out that the system was initially designed to be open to interpretation. You're saying it needs to be changed. OK, so changed to _what_ exactly, and on _who's_ authority? You've probably stated your case a hundred times, and nobody cares. Its because you want it changed to what _you_ want. You're like a child who throws a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.
There's a simple solution to this: ~TECSHARE and place him on ignore like I did. If you re-read my previous interaction with him here, then you can clearly see that he is either full-delusional or has some strong hidden agenda (and no, KingFool this isn't a fallacy). The thread is moving in the wrong direction because of stuff like this.

████████████████████████████
████████▀▀ █▀ █▀ ▀██████████
█████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
██████████▀     ▀  ▀████████
███████▀ ▀  ▄█▀▀▀█▀▀████████
██████▄      █▄  ▀▀  ▀██████
██████         ▄▄█▄ ▄ ▀█████
█████ ▄         ▀▀ ▄ ▀ █████
██████▌          █▀█▀ ▐█████
███████  ▄▌         ▄ ██████
████████▄█         ▄████████
█████████▀     ▄▄ ▄█████████
████████████████████████████
.JACKMATE'S...........
.
MAJESTIC..
████████████████████████
███████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
████████████████████████
.
..WIN 1 BITCOIN ON EVERY PREMIER LEAGUE MATCHDAY..
████████████████████████████████
████████████▀█▀ ▀█▀█▀███████████
███████████▄ ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄████████████
███████████▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████████
█████████▀▄ ██▀▄▄▄ ▀ ▄▀█████████
███████▀ ▀█████▄▄▄█▄▄▄██████████
███████▀▄████████▀  ▀█ █▐███████
███████ ▀█████████▄█▀▀██ ███████
████████ ███▀██████ ▄ ██ ███████
████████▌▐▀▄ ██████████ ▄███████
█████████▄██▌▐█████▀██ █████████
████████████▄▀▀▀▀▀▄ ▀▄██████████
████████████████████████████████
.
.JOIN US - IT'S FREE! .
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1165

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 12:30:26 PM
Last edit: February 03, 2019, 12:52:07 PM by cryptohunter
 #1090



This is completely the opposite for what DT was designed for.

DT can not red trust people for telling the truth and encouraging others to view the evidence to support their claim. The very notion of using red trust this way is disgraceful and although I can tell you have a good mind for presenting a case for anything there is no way for this to be justified.

I would hear your thoughts on the entire matter. This is not at all the same circumstances and accomplishment as your example.

"Absolutely not", is not applicable in this specific case. Unless you agree with the actions of this person.

This is not a grey area like accounts being sold this is totally wrong and against the very principles that DT is supposed to represent.

I know you don't care but you're incorrect in your assumptions about what Trust is to be used for. Trust can be given out for any reason a user sees fit, though theymos discourages leaving ratings based on post quality:

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- List all of the trades that you do with people (or at least the major ones). This is not like #bitcoin-otc where you give people just one score.
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.
- Older ratings count for more, so don't delete old ratings if you can avoid it.
- "Risked BTC" is how much money you could have lost if the person you're rating had turned out to be a scammer. Or, if they are a scammer, it's how much you lost. Use the BTC value at the time of reporting.
- It's OK to post a rating about the person in general, not tied to a specific trade.
- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

Any arguments people make about what Trust is supposed to be used for should reference this list first as it is from the OP of when the Trust system was first introduced.


Please see try to comprehend the stupidity of what you are saying in relation to a score based trust system, and what a corrupt and devious disgusting snake you look like by suggesting it is okay to red trust someone for telling the truth and presenting fact regarding wrongdoing.

DT scores mean absolutely nothing at all if people are getting red trust for highlighting proven wrong doing. Imagine if everyone did this then red trust would be a positive thing in some cases. The entire scoring would be a total waste of time. LOL

WARNING TRADE WITH EXTREME CAUTION THIS PERSON TRIED TO INFORM ON A PROVEN LIAR/SCAMMERS.

haha the wonderful world of meta...

There is no point having a score if some people red for untrustworthy deeds and some red for trust worthy deeds.

Just have a link called feedback and people can decide for themselves is the person who is proven to have lied for financial gain is more trustworthy than someone who high lighted that FACT.

No get back to supporting liars and scammers with some other new variation of ass kissing.

You can not use the red trust to silence people telling the truth and about liars and scammers. Please don't suggest such ludicrous things in public it makes you look completely corrupt.

I would say if anything we should look at the distinct possibility your account is hacked. No chance any person supporting bruno previously would start supporting scammers and liars that ~ bruno. I think people should analyse your account for being hacked or sold snake boy.


TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1560


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2019, 12:58:54 PM
Last edit: February 03, 2019, 01:23:54 PM by TECSHARE
 #1091

What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.

Good, glad to see that we can agree on something, and that the system was initially intended to be highly flexible and open to interpretation -- not nailed down to what a few members believed it should be used for.

Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?

Dude. I'm pointing out that the system was initially designed to be open to interpretation. You're saying it needs to be changed. OK, so changed to _what_ exactly, and on _who's_ authority? You've probably stated your case a hundred times, and nobody cares. Its because you want it changed to what _you_ want. You're like a child who throws a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.

It is not just what I want, it is what lots of people around here have wanted for a long time, but unfortunately any time they make an objection people like you dismiss them as a scammer or an alt, therefore it falls to others around here with a reputation to speak up about it. You act like I am going to get some prize out of this. I will not (other than a more functional forum). What I will get however is a gang of stalkers looking for anything they can to use against me. Don't worry I am sure your mob of inquisitors will dig something up to accuse me of sooner or later. If not I am sure they will just invent something.

I made several logical arguments which no one seems to be able to address here and here. It just seems to be a continual cycle of people who disagree with these points making personal attacks and dumb comments, then acting like there is nothing but dumb comments when I respond. Maybe post something other than dumb comments? I did. You try.


What you are advocating for can never be done because, see the rules, the rules are how it is done, the rules say it therefore the rules must stay that way and can never be changed. End of discussion, everyone please move along nothing to see here.
Is everyone else seeing this pattern of substituting pith and snark in lieu of any logical arguments completely?

>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument

Here come the sock puppet supports now. I guess everyone who criticizes the trust police is a sock, an alt, or a scammer, but if you are using the socks it is perfectly acceptable right? It is almost like you are running out of logical arguments and need to start bringing in "new people" in order to try to maintain your preferred narrative without looking like the dog piling mob that you are actually a part of.


>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument

Dude. I'm pointing out that the system was initially designed to be open to interpretation. You're saying it needs to be changed. OK, so changed to _what_ exactly, and on _who's_ authority? You've probably stated your case a hundred times, and nobody cares. Its because you want it changed to what _you_ want. You're like a child who throws a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.
There's a simple solution to this: ~TECSHARE and place him on ignore like I did. If you re-read my previous interaction with him here, then you can clearly see that he is either full-delusional or has some strong hidden agenda (and no, KingFool this isn't a fallacy). The thread is moving in the wrong direction because of stuff like this.

Yeah, please do ignore me. It will make it much easier for me to tell everyone else who is trying to have a logical debate why this system is a problem without knee jerk interference from the peanut gallery. I am not sure what purpose advocating excluding me from trust lists accomplishes other than you demonstrating yet again you use the trust system as punitive punishment for anyone who dares criticize your behavior, and the behavior of your clique.

Of course I must be delusional or have some hidden agenda right? Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically guilty and deserving of retribution are they? Thanks for once again demonstrating you should never be in a position to judge others.






██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2488


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 01:08:30 PM
Merited by qwk (1)
 #1092

weeew lordy

I can't tell if you're insane or just trying to troll me; maybe a combination of both.

If you really want the system changed, try being more rational when presenting your arguments. Coming across in the manner you do isn't very compelling. Neither is it for TECHSHARE.

I don't have anything else constructive to add to this conversation.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1560


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2019, 01:18:15 PM
 #1093

weeew lordy

I can't tell if you're insane or just trying to troll me; maybe a combination of both.

If you really want the system changed, try being more rational when presenting your arguments. Coming across in the manner you do isn't very compelling. Neither is it for TECHSHARE.

I don't have anything else constructive to add to this conversation.

You mean like everyone else around here is being so rational? What about here and here? No one seems to be able to address any of these points, just constant topic sliding tactics like you are doing right now with that post.


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100
Merit: 1165

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 03, 2019, 01:50:39 PM
Last edit: February 03, 2019, 09:32:10 PM by cryptohunter
 #1094

weeew lordy

I can't tell if you're insane or just trying to troll me; maybe a combination of both.

If you really want the system changed, try being more rational when presenting your arguments. Coming across in the manner you do isn't very compelling. Neither is it for TECHSHARE.

I don't have anything else constructive to add to this conversation.

Nothing else constructive? oh really?? you arguing for unfair and unjust actions to be allowed within a system of trust is constructive?? lol

Isolate the part or parts of my post you have issue with or that you claim make me look insane and I will debate them with you.

Calling persons insane for presenting the truth or highlighting wrongdoing is a common defense in meta. Sorry but that does not work.

I challenge you now to go back to my post and bring here the parts of it that you consider indicate some trolling or signs of insanity because all I see is a person calling you out for supporting the red trusting of persons whom dare to present facts illustrating wrong doing by DT members .

I await your response.

No more bullshit from people like you. Point now to the exact parts of my post that are incorrect. Let's see.

edit--- time passes...

nutildah?... nutildah?? where are you nutildah???  must be with Moglie somewhere.

edit 2 more time passes...

Is nutildah okay?  anyone seen nutildah? ... I am concerned about him now for real.




TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1560


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2019, 12:34:59 PM
 #1095

weeew lordy

I can't tell if you're insane or just trying to troll me; maybe a combination of both.

If you really want the system changed, try being more rational when presenting your arguments. Coming across in the manner you do isn't very compelling. Neither is it for TECHSHARE.

I don't have anything else constructive to add to this conversation.

You mean like everyone else around here is being so rational? What about here and here? No one seems to be able to address any of these points, just constant topic sliding tactics like you are doing right now with that post.

Interesting this post got pulled off the top of this page. I am sure it is just yet another coincidence it was moved to the last page by a report of another post. So here I am presenting my ideas to the forum again. Anyone care to actually have a discussion about it?


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
Veleor
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798
Merit: 1351


Èñj𥠆hê §ïlêñ¢ê


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 06:16:28 PM
Last edit: February 05, 2019, 08:43:49 PM by Veleor
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
 #1096

Yes, they do that and there is a very clear case of trust abuse happening with me. I am not engaged in any shady active here, even I don't earn form signatures by posting here and there is nothing scammy I have done which should state Warning: Trade with extreme caution!.

This is how they try to mob anyone here who tries to speak in some truth about there manipulative works. This is a clear case of lowering the value of once reputed account, without any prove of it being compressed.

VIP account JusticeForYou has been blocked today.

After investigation, I consider the evidence to be most strongly consistent with the hypothesis that his email account was hacked and then used to take his forum account.

He has the same email address as before, but it's @gmx.com, and we all know how secure that is. The forum account was first newly-accessed via email-reset rather than by password. IP evidence is also generally suggestive of it not being the same person. I also find his general behavior to be suspicious.

I asked him some challenge questions related to data I have and the real BTC_Bear should know, but his answers were only half-correct, and are more consistent with having access to a bunch of emails going back to at least 2011 than having actually lived it.

However, while he definitely wouldn't have enough evidence to recover the account if he didn't already have access to it, I have enough doubt that I'm not willing to lock the account at this time. There are plausible explanations for the above evidence against him, and if he is a hacker, he's done an unusually large amount of research, at least. I'd say that there's a 25% chance of him being the original BTC_Bear.

I don't have alternative contact info for BTC_Bear or I'd try contacting him. He was very active on #bitcoin-otc IIRC; maybe someone can try asking nanotube or the other #bitcoin-otc regulars.

BTW, I'd like to take this opportunity to recognize & thank the original BTC_Bear (whether or not he is the current account owner), who on several occasions went to considerable effort to contribute to the forum in the early days.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1769



View Profile WWW
February 05, 2019, 06:41:42 PM
 #1097

Yes, they do that and there is a very clear case of trust abuse happening with me. I am not engaged in any shady active here, even I don't earn form signatures by posting here and there is nothing scammy I have done which should state Warning: Trade with extreme caution!.

This is how they try to mob anyone here who tries to speak in some truth about there manipulative works. This is a clear case of lowering the value of once reputed account, without any prove of it being compressed.

VIP account JusticeForYou has been blocked today.

After investigation, I consider the evidence to be most strongly consistent with the hypothesis that his email account was hacked and then used to take his forum account.

He has the same email address as before, but it's @gmx.com, and we all know how secure that is. The forum account was first newly-accessed via email-reset rather than by password. IP evidence is also generally suggestive of it not being the same person. I also find his general behavior to be suspicious.

I asked him some challenge questions related to data I have and the real BTC_Bear should know, but his answers were only half-correct, and are more consistent with having access to a bunch of emails going back to at least 2011 than having actually lived it.

However, while he definitely wouldn't have enough evidence to recover the account if he didn't already have access to it, I have enough doubt that I'm not willing to lock the account at this time. There are plausible explanations for the above evidence against him, and if he is a hacker, he's done an unusually large amount of research, at least. I'd say that there's a 25% chance of him being the original BTC_Bear.

I don't have alternative contact info for BTC_Bear or I'd try contacting him. He was very active on #bitcoin-otc IIRC; maybe someone can try asking nanotube or the other #bitcoin-otc regulars.

BTW, I'd like to take this opportunity to recognize & thank the original BTC_Bear (whether or not he is the current account owner), who on several occasions went to considerable effort to contribute to the forum in the early days.
You should work on your reading comprehension.

Find the fire hydrant in my Avatar for a prize.
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3584
Merit: 7341


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 06:57:48 PM
Merited by Mr. Big (5), suchmoon (4), dbshck (4), LoyceV (4), chimk (4), sapta (3), actmyname (3), Danslip (2), asche (2), OgNasty (1), qwk (1), Alex_Sr (1), madnessteat (1)
 #1098

I do not view it as appropriate for trust ratings to relate primarily to non-trust matters. By giving someone negative trust, you're basically attaching a note to all of their posts telling people "warning: do not trade with this person!". If we can get DT working well enough, in the future I'd like to prevent guests from even viewing topics by negative-trust users in trust-enabled sections, so you have to ask yourself whether your negative trust would warrant this sort of significant effect.

In particular, in my view:
 - Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
 - Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid.
 - You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
 - It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.
 
I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists.



Now for this month's DT construction:

Old:
Code:
theymos
dooglus
gmaxwell
OgNasty
SebastianJu
qwk
Vod
mprep
Cyrus
monkeynuts
Welsh
ibminer
TMAN
Lauda
TookDk
Mitchell
vizique
Blazed
yogg
greenplastic
hilariousandco
EcuaMobi
Lesbian Cow
cryptodevil
suchmoon
achow101
owlcatz
JohnUser
minerjones
tmfp
BitcoinPenny
yahoo62278
zazarb
LoyceV
actmyname
The Pharmacist
DarkStar_
TheFuzzStone
Jet Cash
marlboroza
Lafu
Hhampuz
xtraelv
krogothmanhattan
Halab
iasenko
coinlocket$
asche
Coolcryptovator
ICOEthics
New:
Code:
theymos
HostFat
gmaxwell
TECSHARE
phantastisch
OgNasty
SebastianJu
qwk
Vod
mprep
Dabs
Cyrus
monkeynuts
Welsh
TMAN
Lauda
Mitchell
vizique
Blazed
yogg
TheNewAnon135246
greenplastic
hilariousandco
EcuaMobi
Lesbian Cow
cryptodevil
suchmoon
achow101
owlcatz
JohnUser
sapta
tmfp
BitcoinPenny
yahoo62278
zazarb
bill gator
LoyceV
actmyname
WhiteManWhite
The Pharmacist
LeGaulois
DarkStar_
TheFuzzStone
Jet Cash
marlboroza
Lafu
Gunthar
Hhampuz
xtraelv
krogothmanhattan
Halab
theyoungmillionaire
o_e_l_e_o
iasenko
coinlocket$
asche
Alex_Sr
taikuri13
Coolcryptovator
ICOEthics

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
asche
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 813


I forgot more than you will ever know.


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 07:01:39 PM
 #1099

In particular, in my view:
 - Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
 - Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid.
 - You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
 - It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.
 

Thank you for your input.

Couldn't agree more on the forgiving point as I had the chance to benefit from it myself.

I don't know the specifics of H8busses, but he called me a sock puppet of Lauda if I recall, and I didn't understand the reason. Not a reason to tag him.
However if he tried to actually "game" the system to his advantage (not saying he did) should THAT be tagged?

With gaming the system I mean influencing DT list for his own sake or agenda and not for legitimate reasons. See Thule et al.

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 4361


nanny of the forum


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 07:05:01 PM
 #1100

HostFat
TECSHARE
zazarb
TheFuzzStone

Are currently excluded. OgNasty is back in. A dozen or so new faces.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dt

Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 »
  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!