Bitcoin Forum
April 21, 2021, 07:51:19 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.21.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: ▄▀▄▀▄ Remove Corruption From DT - Union Trust List ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄  (Read 7686 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (100 posts by 0 users with 33 merit deleted.)
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 03:48:31 PM
 #81

So you admitted buying that account in june 2018

@DT members where is the tagging ?Double standards again ?
What was suchmoon's intent for buying the account?
What are most users' intentions for buying accounts?

Examine the dichotomy, please.


Ohhh what was the intention ?I guess giving free money ($600) to someone for an account he/she can't use and thats why he/she fought so hard to get all the negative taggs removed. /irony off

Funny i never saw you asking me for what purpose i tried to buy an account.

DOUBLE STANDARDS YOU FAGGOT


Oh SORRY !!!!! I forgat i told you the reason i tried to buy an account so a friend would be able to add images on his service thread.But you faggot didn't care
1619034679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619034679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1619034679
Reply with quote  #2

1619034679
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1619034679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619034679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1619034679
Reply with quote  #2

1619034679
Report to moderator
1619034679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619034679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1619034679
Reply with quote  #2

1619034679
Report to moderator
1619034679
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1619034679

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1619034679
Reply with quote  #2

1619034679
Report to moderator
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 04:05:06 PM
 #82

I read the thread and its clear It was a private deal between suchmoon and Bruno for paying his debt and receiving back his other alt.

Even suchmoon fighting to get all the red taggs away was such a laugh to read.

Argumenting that debt is paid there is no reason for a red tagg.No there isn't even somebody tried to sell that account to pay his debt.

Ohhh i forgat now its allowed to offer accounts for sale if you try to pay your debt with it.

Maybe people should not sell accounts directly but indirectly claiming to sell these accounts on private deals to pay their debt.


DOUBLE STANDARD AT ITS FINEST


People should tagg suchmoons alt which was sold by Bruno to suchmoon for $600 .Account sales are discouraged on BCT and lead instantly to red trust

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=349097


Quote
Interesting. And the best method, in your eyes, was to spend more funds than necessary. Instead of posting the service thread yourself, or obtaining a copper membership, or having someone else post the service thread...

You fucking moron at least check for what you are tagging.You tagged a try for an account buy back in 2017.There were no copper memberships.
And asking other people to add images and update it makes completly no sense since you will be always held responsible for that account you have no conrol about or know its full history.
The account offered at that time was
Quote
No loans, No scams, No hacks, Clean Account
.Ideal for a neutral image posting account.



Quote
How quaint. Do you want to spell out why you were buying an account, then? Was it to perhaps prevent the sold account from scamming? You hero.

HA HA HA HA who is going to belive in that shit that suchmoon spending $600 of his own money for a legandary account and removes all its negative taggs just to remove an account which maybe could be used for scams. LOL

Yeah sure funny suchmoon is not buying all accounts.What a samerita.

@actmyname

You are a pisshead and your argumentation are for dumb people.Anyone beliving in that crap must have an IQ like 60.
Even you have no high IQ if you are only able to make up such stupid argumentation


You know cryptohunter is right.Its time to go activly to your escrow thread and inform anyone there that you are a scam escrow who supports account sales and being used as collateral which proof is this thread
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 04:53:25 PM
 #83

Quote
You do realize that $600 was like 0.1 BTC at the time? The red tags I was concerned about were Bruno's, not mine. I wanted him to be able to use the Gage account in a sig campaign and that obviously didn't work out.

So you activly worked on it that Bruno's red taggs get deleted even he tried to sell a legandary account in 2018?
You are a hyprocat .Giving everyone who tries to buy or sell an account negative feedback since 2017 and if there is a benefit for you you jump in and safe his reputation even there is full evidence he tried to sell a legendary to shitposters.
Makes total sense


Quote
No, I didn't. It was pretty much the opposite - preventing that account from getting into the hands of a shitposting/scamming account buyer.
Tagging that account from all DT members would be enough to make it worthless so everyone would know its a bought account.There was no need to pay $600 for that account.


Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 05:38:49 PM
Last edit: February 05, 2019, 05:49:20 PM by Thule
 #84

Your double standards just have been proofed and the abuse of the trust feedback by you

Quote
The $600 was not a payment for the account, which I had no need for. Can't expect a sockpuppeting scammer to understand that of course.
No it was to pay out the debt 0.13B .
If you get the Glem account after paying Brunos debt its clearly a deal to get that account once you pay his debt.


No matter what you got a new account where a payment was involved.If directly or indirectly doesn't matter.


Quote
Can't expect a sockpuppeting scammer

Oh the personal attacks begin again ?No more arguments when facts about you are being presented ?
A DT calling me a scammer but being such a dick unable to show me even a single person i have scammed during the 7 years on this forum.
Your input is like always high quality /irony off



Quote
Case in point. "PM from somebody" LOL. Whatever justification of your vendetta makes you feel better.



Let's see what kind of information we will get
sirazimuth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2240
Merit: 1815


born once atheist


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 06:52:32 PM
 #85

......
We come slowly but we come.No rush needed.
......

There’s a joke in there somewhere.....

Bitcoin...the future of all monetary transactions...and always will be
LoyceV
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2198
Merit: 7835


Thick-Skinned Gang Leader


View Profile WWW
February 05, 2019, 07:08:26 PM
 #86

I'm just leaving this here:
- 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.
(read the full post!)

ac2eugenio
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 275
Merit: 11


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 08:19:18 PM
 #87

I just wanted to try out some new trust features,but what did i get ?redtrust by just customizing my own trustlist,even theymos was excluded few days ago.Does it mean trust is being controlled by these DT members? if you dont want to be painted dont to exclude the Godly DT's here.This looks like politics,not conspiracy to me between i strongly agree that my red trust is inapproriate .Who are these people to control which people you wanted to exlude/include to your list?doesnt make sense.

Its like senatorial elections thus the voting machines are getting tapped by those with the power to do that so they will remain with their position.


OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3612
Merit: 2220


Crypto Casino & Sportsbook


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 09:41:05 PM
 #88

Damn...  You really got flamed for your opinion here.  I guess if you aren't part of the "Cult of Lauda" (what they're calling themselves now) then you aren't allowed to have an opinion about other people's trust lists.  Only the "Cult of Lauda" is allowed to publicly post trust suggestions without retaliation.  While it is admirable to point out their abuse of the trust network as they try and undermine what theymos is trying to accomplish, allowing them to continue to rack up 'violations' of the system will only benefit the end goal of having them permanently blacklisted.

I'm just wondering who is going to be blacklisted first...  I would have thought for sure TMAN, but now Lauda is throwing his hat in the ring.


I'm just leaving this here:
- It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post.

That's how most of us likely found our way here...


██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████▀▀▀        ▀▀█████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████▀    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ███████████████████████████████████████████████
█████    ▄█████████▌   ▐█████▀  ▐███████████████▌  ▀██████████████████
████▌   ▐██████████    █████    ████████████████    ██████████████████
████▌   ▐█████████▄▄▄▄█████▌   ▐███████████████▌   ▐███▀▀█████████████
█████    ▀███████████████▀▀        ▄███████████    ██▀   ▐████████████
██████▄     ▀▀███████▀▀         ▄▄███▀▀▀▀█████▌   ▐▀   ▄███▀▀   ▀█████
█████████▄▄     ▀▀███▄  ▄▄    ████▀    ▄   ███       ▄███▀   ▄█  ▐████
█████████████▄▄     ▀████▌   ▐███▀   ███   ██▌      ████    ██▀  █████
██████▀▀   ▀█████▄    ███    ████   ███▌  ▐██    ▌  ▐██▌      ▄▄██████
█████    ▄████████    ▐██    ██▀▀   ██▀   ▐▀    ▐█   ██▌   ▀██▀▀  ████
████▌   ▐████████▀    ███▄     ▄▄▄     ▄    ▄   ▐██   ██▄      ▄▄█████
████▌   ███████▀    ▄███████████████████████████████▄  ▀▀██████▀▀ ████
█████    ▀▀▀▀     ▄█████████▀    ▀█▀    ▀█       ▀████▄▄         ▄████
██████▄▄    ▄▄▄▄████████████  █████  ██  █  █  █  ████████████████████
█████████████████████████  █▄    ▄█▄    ▄█  █  █  ████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀▐▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█▀▀▀█████████▀▀▀█▄
▄█▀    ▄▀█████▀     ▀█▄
▄█▄    █        ▀▄   ███▄
▄████▀▀▀▀▄       ▄▀▀▀▀▀███▄
████      ▀▄▄▄▄▄▀       ███
███     ▄▄███████▄▄     ▄▀█
█  ▀▄ ▄▀ ▀███████▀ ▀▄ ▄▀  █
▀█   █     ▀███▀     ▀▄  █▀
▀█▄▄█▄      █        █▄█▀
▀█████▄ ▄▀▀ ▀▀▄▄ ▄▄███▀
▀█████        ████▀
▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▀▀
● OVER 1000 GAMES
● DAILY RACES AND BONUSES
● 24/7 LIVE SUPPORT
ac2eugenio
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 275
Merit: 11


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 09:49:02 PM
 #89

Damn...  You really got flamed for your opinion here.  I guess if you aren't part of the "Cult of Lauda" (what they're calling themselves now) then you aren't allowed to have an opinion about other people's trust lists.  Only the "Cult of Lauda" is allowed to publicly post trust suggestions without retaliation.  While it is admirable to point out their abuse of the trust network as they try and undermine what theymos is trying to accomplish, allowing them to continue to rack up 'violations' of the system will only benefit the end goal of having them permanently blacklisted.

I'm just wondering who is going to be blacklisted first...  I would have thought for sure TMAN, but now Lauda is throwing his hat in the ring.


I'm just leaving this here:
- It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post.

That's how most of us likely found our way here...
I would rather be accused a criminal than be part of that cult.They are enjoying the days with trust system but im sure something will happen if Theymos reconstruct how the forum works.We should have atleast one big poll asking which DTmembers should be blacklisted numbers wont lie,if they are good as you OgNasty they wont be removed.I just supported someone with good advocate and i immediately got negative trust funny asf.
H8bussesNbicycles
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10

▄▀ REMOVE LAUDA FROM DT


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 10:13:55 PM
 #90

Damn...  You really got flamed for your opinion here.  I guess if you aren't part of the "Cult of Lauda" (what they're calling themselves now) then you aren't allowed to have an opinion about other people's trust lists.  Only the "Cult of Lauda" is allowed to publicly post trust suggestions without retaliation.  While it is admirable to point out their abuse of the trust network as they try and undermine what theymos is trying to accomplish



yes
 i am hoping to reach -9999 trust for my opinion  Wink
too bad theymos's word will probably cause some to be removed so i will have to find more ways for my opinion to offend the cult into leaving me negative trust
when this started they though negative trust affected me


i would explain my true reasoning why to remove lauda and some lesser cult members but to do that could pinpoint me (ognasty i will send you a pm)
it has nothing to do with scammers
fuck scammers and fuck idiots stupid enough to fall for scammers too


i know my list has some bad users on it and excludes some good users in collateral damage that i am not proud of but the war to remove lauda is worth the sacrifice
please i beg good users excluded on my list to remove lauda so you do not have to go down in this war


think
i am smart enough and educated enough about bitcointalk to create this masterful piece of work to fight evil here dont you think i could pull off a hell of a scam if i wanted to ?


if i wanted to scam i could easily do it
i know how this place works
the ins and outs and what can be done
here i am fighting for morality
fighting for the good of this forum and am sorry for the casualties but lauda and likeminded have to go

▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ REMOVE LAUDA and Corruption FROM DT ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988
H8bussesNbicycles
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10

▄▀ REMOVE LAUDA FROM DT


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:20:54 PM
 #91

Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.


Well, it appears that this movement will have to come up with a different strategy. Enlisting a merit source does not appear to be the way to go. Good luck. Kiss
If you want merits, better hope to find an audience who legitimately appreciates what you have to write. The OP definitely has a few fans.  Wink

doing better than your average newbie and not even rimjobing sources

▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ REMOVE LAUDA and Corruption FROM DT ▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀▄ bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:45:14 PM
 #92

Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.


Well, it appears that this movement will have to come up with a different strategy. Enlisting a merit source does not appear to be the way to go. Good luck. Kiss
If you want merits, better hope to find an audience who legitimately appreciates what you have to write. The OP definitely has a few fans.  Wink


There are other supporters who have already 250 merits.
These DT abusers can't push new alts as quickly into DT as we are groing.
Like i said just a matter of time.
And in my opinion theymos will allow in the end to give people you support merit to equal the imbalance some DT members have created

Also you should read cryptohunters post.He already showed another possibility.
OgNasty
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3612
Merit: 2220


Crypto Casino & Sportsbook


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 05:04:27 AM
Last edit: February 06, 2019, 05:32:50 AM by OgNasty
 #93

Check out the latest trust rating Lauda has left me.  



The reference thread takes you to a complaint from minifrij where he was upset that I pointed out he removes/replaces feedback when he doesn't get his way.  Today I also pointed out that Lauda has engaged in this same behavior against user rmcdermott927 on this forum.  Anybody know how me pointing out that minifrij is attempting to bully me into removing my feedback by misusing the trust network equates to me being a scammer?  How does this fit into a reasonable DefaultTrust network rating?

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.

I've got a popular escrow service on this site, am the OP of a longstanding community organization as well as a proof of concept Green Energy Project, sell lots of different products, & regularly try to help newbies with their issues here.  Is it right that guests should no longer be able to view my posts because I stood up to the bullying of Lauda & friends?



EVIDENCE OF LAUDA BULLYING RMCDERMOTT927
Are we seeing a pattern yet with these users?


8/23/18: Lauda left this retaliatory trust rating:


10/06/18: Lauda noticed that rmcdermott927 was no longer showing a red trust rating so he once again removed/replaced his rating:


01/15/19: Lauda noticed that rmcdermott927 was no longer showing a red trust rating so he once again removed/replaced his rating:


██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
████████▀▀▀        ▀▀█████████████████████████████████████████████████
██████▀    ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄    ███████████████████████████████████████████████
█████    ▄█████████▌   ▐█████▀  ▐███████████████▌  ▀██████████████████
████▌   ▐██████████    █████    ████████████████    ██████████████████
████▌   ▐█████████▄▄▄▄█████▌   ▐███████████████▌   ▐███▀▀█████████████
█████    ▀███████████████▀▀        ▄███████████    ██▀   ▐████████████
██████▄     ▀▀███████▀▀         ▄▄███▀▀▀▀█████▌   ▐▀   ▄███▀▀   ▀█████
█████████▄▄     ▀▀███▄  ▄▄    ████▀    ▄   ███       ▄███▀   ▄█  ▐████
█████████████▄▄     ▀████▌   ▐███▀   ███   ██▌      ████    ██▀  █████
██████▀▀   ▀█████▄    ███    ████   ███▌  ▐██    ▌  ▐██▌      ▄▄██████
█████    ▄████████    ▐██    ██▀▀   ██▀   ▐▀    ▐█   ██▌   ▀██▀▀  ████
████▌   ▐████████▀    ███▄     ▄▄▄     ▄    ▄   ▐██   ██▄      ▄▄█████
████▌   ███████▀    ▄███████████████████████████████▄  ▀▀██████▀▀ ████
█████    ▀▀▀▀     ▄█████████▀    ▀█▀    ▀█       ▀████▄▄         ▄████
██████▄▄    ▄▄▄▄████████████  █████  ██  █  █  █  ████████████████████
█████████████████████████  █▄    ▄█▄    ▄█  █  █  ████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄
█  ▄▀▄             █▀▀▐▀▄▄
█  █▀█             █  ▐  ▐▌
█       ▄██▄       █  ▌  █
█     ▄██████▄     █  ▌ ▐▌
█    ██████████    █ ▐  █
█   ▐██████████▌   █ ▐ ▐▌
█    ▀▀██████▀▀    █ ▌ █
█     ▄▄▄██▄▄▄     █ ▌▐▌
█                  █▐ █
█                  █▐▐▌
█                  █▐█
▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀█
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█▀▀▀█████████▀▀▀█▄
▄█▀    ▄▀█████▀     ▀█▄
▄█▄    █        ▀▄   ███▄
▄████▀▀▀▀▄       ▄▀▀▀▀▀███▄
████      ▀▄▄▄▄▄▀       ███
███     ▄▄███████▄▄     ▄▀█
█  ▀▄ ▄▀ ▀███████▀ ▀▄ ▄▀  █
▀█   █     ▀███▀     ▀▄  █▀
▀█▄▄█▄      █        █▄█▀
▀█████▄ ▄▀▀ ▀▀▄▄ ▄▄███▀
▀█████        ████▀
▀▀█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▀▀
● OVER 1000 GAMES
● DAILY RACES AND BONUSES
● 24/7 LIVE SUPPORT
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408
Merit: 2056



View Profile
February 06, 2019, 05:11:11 AM
 #94

Check out the latest trust rating Lauda has left me.



The reference thread takes you to a complaint from minifrij where he was upset that I pointed out he removes/replaces feedback when he doesn't get his way.  Today I also pointed out that Lauda has engaged in this same behavior against user rmcdermott927 on this forum.  Anybody know how me pointing out that minifrij is attempting to bully me by misusing the trust network equates to me being a scammer?  How does this fit into a reasonable DefaultTrust network rating? 
It is no secret that Lauda routinely gives negative ratings in order to silence criticism of him and his associates.


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   ▄▄████████████████▄▄
 ▄█████▀▀▀██████▀▀▀█████▄
▄████▀  ▀▀▀    ▀▀▀  ▀████▄
████▀                ▀████
███▀                  ▀███
███       ▄    ▄       ███
██▀      ███  ███      ▀██
██       ▀█▀  ▀█▀       ██
██▄     ▄        ▄     ▄██
▀██▄     ▀▀▄▄▄▄▀▀     ███▀
 ▀███▄▄▄▄▄▄████▄▄▄▄▄▄███▀
   ▀▀████████████████▀▀
Bazinga442
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 24


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 08:03:33 AM
 #95

god has spoken  Grin
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.

any takers?
BTW, are signatures allowed for this type of thing? I will gladly pay for a set if folks will wear them without fear. Hopefully, they can help spread the word about this thread and the vile chancers ruining this forum.

Any interested and competent signature designers reading this can pm me with their samples and price. Don't mind the fake ratings on my trust, but if it bothers you, I'll go 1st if you're "trusted" or we use an escrow.


About meriting, surely, it wouldn't be considered manipulation if awarded to good posts, regardless of whether the poster is an "undesirable"? In this case a thread like this would suffice: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093271.0 - where posters can report good unmerited post and anybody can merit them if they choose to.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 08:42:06 AM
 #96

About meriting, surely, it wouldn't be considered manipulation if awarded to good posts, regardless of whether the poster is an "undesirable"? In this case a thread like this would suffice: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093271.0 - where posters can report good unmerited post and anybody can merit them if they choose to.

The moderators already started to (anonymously) de-merit us.

Bazinga442
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 24


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 08:49:54 AM
Last edit: February 06, 2019, 10:57:58 AM by Bazinga442
 #97

About meriting, surely, it wouldn't be considered manipulation if awarded to good posts, regardless of whether the poster is an "undesirable"? In this case a thread like this would suffice: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093271.0 - where posters can report good unmerited post and anybody can merit them if they choose to.

The moderators already started to (anonymously) de-merit us.


Nah, that was theymos throwing them dogs a bone.


Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me.
Deena
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 49


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 08:55:43 AM
 #98

Come on, do you really think that Bitcointalk staff is conspiring against you?

Definately not against little me. But for the scamming clique is thinkable.


Nah, that was theymos giving the dogs a bone.


Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me.

So now the overlord is interfering with his own setup systems because they don't do what he likes? [sarcasm]What a decentralized and democratic forum this is indeed. [/sarcasm]
Bazinga442
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 221
Merit: 24


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 09:02:31 AM
Last edit: February 06, 2019, 10:58:48 AM by Bazinga442
 #99

So now the overlord is interfering with his own setup systems because they don't do what he likes? [sarcasm]What a decentralized and democratic forum this is indeed. [/sarcasm]

Don't sweat it, god don't always get it right. After all, s/he created Satan and this shitty world  Wink
Laters! signing off humming to Joan Osborne's - what if god was one of us?
Just a slob like one of us?...
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 275


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 09:12:31 AM
Last edit: February 06, 2019, 09:34:27 AM by Thule
 #100

What i accuse theymos is he is very often acting one sided in favour of the cult.

I mean we provided so many evidences of their merit abuse like giving 50 mertis for totaly shitposts,bounty threads, or even a 2 word reply
and theymos did nothing.
These DT members have abused the merit system for months were regular user didn't care about merits since they have no intention to sell something on this board or would even care about merit.
I mean even the most merit these DT members have are not from quality posts at all.Somebody can point me to a single quality post of TMAN or Vod as example ?
They got their merit for their actions to tagg someone.To attack a questionable person or project and there was nothing about any quality post.

And when somebody like stinger support our actions it instantly gets removed.

@Theymos why don't you remove all the merits from current DT members who mainly got them from people supporting their actions and not the quality of posts ?
I mean they even openly admitted in the past to merit people for their actions.
You want me to show you how they merited even on Meta when defaming people with shitposts ?You call that the idea of quality ?
So if i support Lauda's abuse and send merits to his abuse threads its ok.But if somebody sends us merits to support our anti abuse thread its not ok.
You wanna tell me Lauda and its cult is not using these merits to manifest their position on this forum?

Why do you create such a heavy imbalance ?

You demand from your current DT members WAY WAY less than you demand from regular member who wants abusers out of the DT system.

Just have a look here 77 merits for his action or do you call this a quality post
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5105303.0

2 more videos supporting the cult and this 1 month old account will be in DT1


But i guess that will be well deserved?
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!