An obvious case of trust abuse (DT members welcome)

[cryptohunter]

The situation has been handled. Users (including DT members) looked at it, the counterparty responded. The outcome not being what you wanted doesn't mean the system failed. It actually shows that the system works properly as opposed to bending to your will.

No it demonstrates that people don't give 1 fuck what theymos says here and just do what they want with red trust.
It demonstrates that you support giving red trust outside of what theymos said red trust was for. Hence you are abusing the trust system and presenting yet another net negative post.


1. is he a scammer?
2. is he strongly likely to scam?

NO?? so remove the red trust then because RED trust is for SCAMMERS and those STRONGLY likely to scam.

this is a neutral trust UNLESS the project is a scam and he is aware of this.

200 posts in one week is not spamming unless the content is low quality and crap.. even then that is worth a neutral and reporting to the  mods to take care of it.

[1715647089]

1715647089

[1715647089]

1715647089

[1715647089]

1715647089

[suchmoon]

The situation has been handled. Users (including DT members) looked at it, the counterparty responded. The outcome not being what you wanted doesn't mean the system failed. It actually shows that the system works properly as opposed to bending to your will.

No it demonstrates that people don't give 1 fuck what theymos says here and just do what they want with red trust.
It demonstrates that you support giving red trust outside of what theymos said red trust was for. Hence you are abusing the trust system and presenting yet another net negative post.


1. is he a scammer?
2. is he strongly likely to scam?

NO?? so remove the red trust then because RED trust is for SCAMMERS and those STRONGLY likely to scam.

this is a neutral trust UNLESS the project is a scam and he is aware of this.

200 posts in one week is not spamming unless the content is low quality and crap.. even then that is worth a neutral and reporting to the  mods to take care of it.

If you had bothered to read the thread or at least looked at the trust pages of involved individuals you would know that I didn't post red trust for the OP so there is nothing for me to remove.

Quit shitposting your butthurt nonsense on every fucking thread and start working on your own positive contributions to the forum.

[cryptohunter]

The situation has been handled. Users (including DT members) looked at it, the counterparty responded. The outcome not being what you wanted doesn't mean the system failed. It actually shows that the system works properly as opposed to bending to your will.

No it demonstrates that people don't give 1 fuck what theymos says here and just do what they want with red trust.
It demonstrates that you support giving red trust outside of what theymos said red trust was for. Hence you are abusing the trust system and presenting yet another net negative post.


1. is he a scammer?
2. is he strongly likely to scam?

NO?? so remove the red trust then because RED trust is for SCAMMERS and those STRONGLY likely to scam.

this is a neutral trust UNLESS the project is a scam and he is aware of this.

200 posts in one week is not spamming unless the content is low quality and crap.. even then that is worth a neutral and reporting to the  mods to take care of it.

If you had bothered to read the thread or at least looked at the trust pages of involved individuals you would know that I didn't post red trust for the OP so there is nothing for me to remove.

Quit shitposting your butthurt nonsense on every fucking thread and start working on your own positive contributions to the forum.

LOL if you bothered to read even one post I made hehe. Your posts often make me laugh ...you are always doing this.

I never said you did. Learn to read skank. You are simply endorsing actions that are not sanctioned by theymos. You support abuse you are an abuser. Remember how you said it goes??

There is no point saying the system is working great when it is obviously not giving the results theymos intended.

My achievements surpass anything you will ever dream of here.

[DireWolfM14]

But you both don't seem to have good judgement.

@deisik
Suchmoon just illustrated the crux of the matter.  It's not beyond the realm of possibilities that Lucius will end up on DT2, but if he continues to leave frivolous reviews such as this the odds are getting smaller and smaller.  

Anyway, this campaign lasted for 8 weeks. For me, it started with this post and ended with this one. That makes a total of 1100 posts which produces less than 140 posts per week. So much for "making over 200+ posts", huh. Apart from that, you may actually want to visit my profile to see how many merits I earned during the last couple of months (read, a lot more than you). It seems like you desperately need a good reality check right now

I didn't go looking into your post history too deep, but for fuck's sake!  1100 posts in two months to promote a casino which has already been accused of promoting spam?  That seems like a lot to me, and it's actually twice your average posting habits.  The table below includes your posts made during the campaign.  

Date Registered: November 02, 2013
Total posts: 20857
Average Daily Posts: 10.15
Average Weekly Posts: 76.04
Average Monthly Posts: 324.15

Indeed the number seem to show that Lucius' claim was accurate for the time period in question.  You posted nearly twice your average during the campaign.  Again, I didn't dig deep enough to try and ascertain your posting habits, and see what are what aren't shit-posts, but certainly the numbers do tell a story of their own.

It seems to me that you are taking this situation as seriously as you are because maybe you're insulted by the allegation.  Perhaps you are as offended as you are because you know there's some truth to it.  You have other negative feedback, which on it's face would seem more concerning, but yet you are not bothered by it.

Take a closer look at yourself and assess why this is so important to you.  Lucius is not DT2 so his review is as meaningless as the other reviews you've been ignoring for years.  Lucius has already indicated that he would have discussed the issue with you in private.  The longer you keep bickering in public the more likely both of you will be insulted enough to develop a grudge that cannot be repaired.  

[deisik]

The situation has been handled

I definitely like your doublespeak

...

Let's make things simple

You come up with a couple of posts from my recent post history which you consider spam and then we continue talking. Until then all your insinuations like stake.com promoting spam, me making over 200 posts a week, numbers telling a story of their own, some truth being there, etc are just that (i.e. insinuations only)

Really, if it is mostly spam, or a significant part of it is spam (what you seem to be implying here), you won't actually have to dig a lot deeper as such posts won't be hard to find, right? Otherwise, your whole narrative starts looking like another unsubstantiated accusation itself (well, at least that's how it feels)

[The Cryptovator]

I think OP could lock the thread now. Seems both are not agree with DT's opinions eventually. Since both of you are not on DT network, other DT member can't help you expect leave own opinions. No one can force some other to remove feedback. But if both of you or anyone were DT network then other DT could help you by leave counter feedback's and by exclusion/inclusion. On the other hand DT members have received too much untrusted feedback's more than you and they can't open thread for every single feedback's. So don't worry about untrusted  feedback's, if it become trusted on future then may be other DT's could leave counter feedback's.

[DireWolfM14]

...

Let's make things simple

Yes, lets.  Quit whining, lock this thread, and talk to Lucius like an adult.

[deisik]

I think OP could lock the thread now. Seems both are not agree with DT's opinions eventually. Since both of you are not on DT network, other DT member can't help you expect leave own opinions. No one can force some other to remove feedback

I consider this issue neither resolved nor handled as essentially nothing has changed apart from me leaving a neutral rating for the perp. Further, I've been accused of spamming even in this thread itself. And since I challenged these people to provide any real evidence of that (which they failed to do so far), I think they should be given some time before they can be officially declared slanderers and forum enemies as well as given negative rating too (just kidding, though who knows)

In this way, I will keep this thread open for the time being

...

Let's make things simple

Yes, lets.  Quit whining, lock this thread, and talk to Lucius like an adult

So how's your quest for my spam posts going, found something?

[Lucius]

I didn't go looking into your post history too deep, but for fuck's sake!  1100 posts in two months to promote a casino which has already been accused of promoting spam?  That seems like a lot to me, and it's actually twice your average posting habits.  The table below includes your posts made during the campaign.  

Date Registered: November 02, 2013
Total posts: 20857
Average Daily Posts: 10.15
Average Weekly Posts: 76.04
Average Monthly Posts: 324.15

Indeed the number seem to show that Lucius' claim was accurate for the time period in question.  You posted nearly twice your average during the campaign.  Again, I didn't dig deep enough to try and ascertain your posting habits, and see what are what aren't shit-posts, but certainly the numbers do tell a story of their own.

It seems to me that you are taking this situation as seriously as you are because maybe you're insulted by the allegation.  Perhaps you are as offended as you are because you know there's some truth to it.  You have other negative feedback, which on it's face would seem more concerning, but yet you are not bothered by it.

Take a closer look at yourself and assess why this is so important to you.  Lucius is not DT2 so his review is as meaningless as the other reviews you've been ignoring for years.  Lucius has already indicated that he would have discussed the issue with you in private.  The longer you keep bickering in public the more likely both of you will be insulted enough to develop a grudge that cannot be repaired.  

I think you wrote everything essential in your post, and fact that deisik is only interested in how to convince DT members, and others to tag me it speaks for itself. 1100 post in two months is something quite natural for him, but only when signature campaign is asking that from them.

I am not the only one who thinks that he is signature spammer, it is proven fact from past and it is not false information as he write in my trust summary. In time when he is in Coinroll signature campaign posting 200-300 posts per week is also normal thing.

Just few quotes what respected campaign manager think about his posting :

I have a full list and if needed can be given upon request via PM. Either you or Shorena may request it. I have requested access to remove every neg trusted user as well as 1 nut who's posting 200+ posts per week. 50% of the participants are inactive accounts or banned

Who's that nut?
obviously you post 200-300 posts per week and it's way overboard.

When I get home I'll be more then happy to quote it all for you. It's blatantly obvious you are posting like a madman to assraped coinroll weekly.

No-one else on this forum posts that many posts weekly and survives it. Not sure why they are allowing you.

I can admit you have some quality posts but not 275 weekly

[Patatas]

My post history is as it was before today (apart from new posts added, of course)

What if you deleted your previous posts just like you did in this thread? You were not too quick in doing that. I wonder what made you change your mind to delete that post.

[DireWolfM14]

So how's your quest for my spam posts going, found something?

I've already spent more time on this subject than it deserves.  Best of luck to you.

[deisik]

...

I think I should in fact give you a neg rating after all

I can admit you have some quality posts but not 275 weekly

And while we are at it, I will pay 1 dollar in litecoins for every single week within which I made more than 250 (two hundred and fifty) posts since 2017 (2017 included, obviously) because I know it with almost 100% certainty that I never made that many posts in any given week in the last few years (let alone 275). But if I'm in fact mistaken about it, then whoever proves me wrong here will be able to earn dough, as simple as it gets. My post history is as it was before today (apart from new posts added, of course)

As the saying goes, when money talks, bullshit walks

So how's your quest for my spam posts going, found something?

I've already spent more time on this subject than it deserves.  Best of luck to you.

Good riddance

My post history is as it was before today (apart from new posts added, of course)

What if you deleted your previous posts just like you did in this thread? You were not too quick in doing that. I wonder what made you change your mind to delete that post.

What if the accusations of spamming are in fact ludicrous? And which post do you refer to? Maybe, this one:

That attitude is exactly the reason why I believe you were/are considered as a spammer. I don't fuckin need to find any threads. If you think you're not a spammer, convince the dude that left you a negative trust and not me. I give two flying fucks about your existence on this forum because you clearly haven't contributed shit

So you can't substantiate your claims. Okay then

As you can see, in all your three points, you are either severely distorting the facts or just outright lying. So what are you actually doing here? What is your agenda?

My agenda - Leave you the fuck alone and stop trying to post my opinions on why you don't deserve a negative tag.

That's not how it looks and feels. So much for "well-qualified shit-posting"

I often merge my previous replies into one (like this one). Get used to it

[chimk]

Unfortunately, his reference doesn't really say anything about the validity of his negative feedback

Everyone should be handing out feedbacks with basically the same idea of what does and doesn't warrant a neg.  Theymos pretty much established that leaving negs for shitposting isn't appropriate, and adding a ridiculous bitcoin amount to it only makes it worse--that could easily get a DT member booted if he/she did that

My post history is open for anyone to see with posts being as they were when submitted, apart from minor changes here and there, e.g. due to spelling errors or style corrections (as I do care about such things)

Then Lucius can either revise the rating or let it stay and likely get excluded. That's how it's "dealt with accordingly" since there is no way to force anyone to change their rating

Okay then. It is mostly about making people responsible for their actions (and reactions)

I looked at your posts. Why did you negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014?
http://archive.li/FdM1t

...нaдo цeнy cкидывaть

Maйcкиe cкидки, нaлeтaй! 

Дaю 0.1 BTC зa Pivo (stahanovec нe интepecyeт)... Ктo бoльшe?

Xoтя ник oтвpaтный...

Xoтя ник oтвpaтный...

Пoльзa пивa

    Умepeннoe yпoтpeблeниe пивa, вoзмoжнo, yмeньшaeт тoкcичecкий эффeкт aлюминия, являющeгocя oднoй из пpeдпoлoжитeльныx пpичин paзвития бoлeзни Aльцгeймepa.
    У пивa бoлee низкaя кaлopийнocть (42 ккaл/100г), чeм y яблoчнoгo coкa, фpyктoвыx нaпиткoв, в кoтopыe дoбaвляeтcя caxap, нe гoвopя o мoлoкe.
    Ha ocнoвe пивa coздaнo нecкoлькo диeт.
    Пивo oблaдaeт диypeтичecким дeйcтвиeм.
    Пивo pacшиpяeт кpoвeнocныe cocyды.

 

C yчeтoм cкидки в 50% oтдaм зa 0,5 BTC

He, был бы ник пpиличный - eщё мoжнo былo бы пoтopгoвaтьcя. И пpo "пoльзy" пивa мнe нe нaдo втиpaть - мнe имeннo ник нe нpaвитcя, был бы eщё кaкoй-нибyдь weissbier, a тaк...

Дaю 0.15 BTC!

Дaю 0.15 BTC!

0.3 BTC co Cтaxaнoвцeм и пo pyкaм 

Cтaxaнoвeц мнe и нa xep нe yпaл. Был бы Гepoй - eщё мoжнo былo бы пoдyмaть (мнe жe пepeд yвaжaeмыми людьми выcтyпaть)!

0.2 BTC - этo пocлeдняя цeнa (бля, этo пoчти 100 бaкcoв пo нынeшнeмy кypcy!), и тo тoлькo иcключитeльнo из-зa Бaзилиo...

Пoxoжe кoличecтвo cпaмa в ближaйшee вpeмя в пoлитзaкyткe мoжeт yвeличитьcя нa 100 или 200% 

Зa Гepoя c пpиличным никoм (neiros мeня ycтpaивaeт) дaю 0.25 BTC. Moжнo oтпиcaтьcя в личкy...

...и тo тoлькo иcключитeльнo из-зa Бaзилиo...

Дa, Бaзилиo кyльтoвый пepcoнaж, вo вce вpeмeнa aктyaлeн.

Зaбиpaй eгo     

1FhfHsf2KLGRcEvtAP2TsCDxbtsBvMnkPp 

Пocлe 20-гo мaя (нaдo былo paньшe дaть знaть), тaкжe xoтeлocь бы вocпoльзoвaтьcя escrow. Moжeт ктo-нибyдь зa этo вpeмя и пepeбьёт цeнy (или пpeдлoжит пpиличный aккayнт нa лyчшиx ycлoвияx)...

Пocлe 20-гo мaя (нaдo былo paньшe дaть знaть), тaкжe xoтeлocь бы вocпoльзoвaтьcя escrow. Moжeт ктo-нибyдь зa этo вpeмя и пepeбьёт цeнy (или пpeдлoжит пpиличный aккayнт нa лyчшиx ycлoвияx)...

Кyдa yж paньшe, oбъявлeниe c нaчaлa aпpeля виcит. 

Я нe видeл и дaжe нe знaл, чтo здecь мoжнo лeгaльнo пoкyпaть-пpoдaвaть aккayнты...

[chimk]

I looked at your posts. Why did you negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014?
http://archive.li/FdM1t

I did not negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014 as it hadn't been sold. I was negotiating but it ended with nothing:

This is what I write about. It was an attempt that was in May. You then twice, wrote about it in other topics.
in June https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114643.msg7220375#msg7220375
in July https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=552602.msg7714515#msg7714515
The problem is that now it is not clear whether you bought in another place or not. I do not think that buying and selling accounts is a good practice for the forum.

[Thule]

I looked at your posts. Why did you negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014?
http://archive.li/FdM1t

I did not negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014 as it hadn't been sold. I was negotiating but it ended with nothing:

This is what I write about. It was an attempt that was in May. You then twice, wrote about it in other topics.
in June https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114643.msg7220375#msg7220375
in July https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=552602.msg7714515#msg7714515
The problem is that now it is not clear whether you bought in another place or not. I do not think that buying and selling accounts is a good practice for the forum.

Who cares if he bought in 2014 ?It was allowed at that time.
Your poor try to discredit OP just shows what an idiot you are.
You wanna discredit him for a possible account purchase in 2014 ?

Maybe you should start tagging nearly all DT and legendary members for it.

fucking idiot and merit whore

[deisik]

I looked at your posts. Why did you negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014?
http://archive.li/FdM1t

I did not negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014 as it hadn't been sold. I was negotiating but it ended with nothing:

Чтo зa тoн, я нe пoнял? Oкcтиcь, я мoгy и пepeдyмaть...

Дa мнe пoxyй чo ты тaм мoжeшь или нe мoжeшь, тeбя зa язык никтo нe тянyл. Дa-дa, нeт - xoди лecoм и выгляди пиздaбoлoм.

Toгдa дaннaя cдeлкa oтмeняeтcя - нayчиcь для нaчaлa цивилизoвaннo peшaть пoдoбныe вoпpocы... 20-e мaя былo бы чepeз нeдeлю (и этo кpaйний cpoк для oкoнчaтeльнoгo oтвeтa), нe чepeз мecяц или гoд. Moё пpeдлoжeниe пpo 0.25 BTC зa Гepoя c пpиличным никoм ocтaётcя в cилe... 

Why did you omit that part? It was just a couple posts below. Anyway, someone bought this account later (like in 2016), though I'm not sure as I didn't follow it. But it wasn't me. As I said, I'm not involved in this kind of activities and back in the day it was more like entertainment because you could actually buy a Hero account and legitimately get away with it, which I specifically mentioned (you may want to translate that part for me)

I looked at your posts. Why did you negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014?
http://archive.li/FdM1t

I did not negotiate the purchase of an account in 2014 as it hadn't been sold. I was negotiating but it ended with nothing:

This is what I write about. It was an attempt that was in May. You then twice, wrote about it in other topics.
in June https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=114643.msg7220375#msg7220375
in July https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=552602.msg7714515#msg7714515
The problem is that now it is not clear whether you bought in another place or not

The real problem is that I didn't buy any accounts in any place over here (to begin with)
 
And yes, I wrote about that particular case of the attempted account purchase in other topics, and so what? If you are trying to build a case against me or discredit me somehow (which tells more about yourself than me, just in case), you may want to start a new thread, really. But you are welcome, anyway. It will be fun to watch as you fail miserably

I do not think that buying and selling accounts is a good practice for the forum

I actually support this view (other than it being a foul accusation, of course), and I'm happy that I didn't buy that account (or any other account, for the record) as it would now have turned into a toxic asset, a liability

Who cares if he bought in 2014 ?It was allowed at that time.
Your poor try to discredit OP just shows what an idiot you are.
You wanna discredit him for a possible account purchase in 2014?

The truth is that I never bought (or sold) any accounts here, neither in 2014 nor in any other year, whether it was allowed or not

[suchmoon]

~

Will you stop deleting and re-posting? It's against the rules and annoying AF.

[DireWolfM14]

~

Will you stop deleting and re-posting? It's against the rules and annoying AF.

Kinda feels like spamming your watch list, doesn't it?

Oops, did I use the word spam in relation to deisik?  Now I'm in for 4 pages of text-walls about how deisik isn't spammer. 

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Damn!  I don't know why deisik is getting hazed so hard in this thread, but man is this harsh.

Deisik, I wouldn't worry about the account sale attempt from 2014, as I don't think anyone is going to go back that far to tag someone for account buying or selling--nor do I think they should.  It was a different time back then, and the account dealing situation wasn't the massive problem that it would turn out to be.

As I said, I never considered deisik a shitposter.  He did crank out a huge number of posts in a short period of time, but as far as quality goes, I've seen much worse.  It is possible for someone to devote a tremendous amount of time to posting and in the process churn out 250 posts in a week and still manage to make most of them relatively decent.  I still don't think it's right to tag you for the amount of posts you made, but since it's  untrusted feedback, I would recommend just rolling with it and move on.  Retaliatory feedback is usually not justified, btw.  Be the bigger person and maybe Lucius will cool down and reconsider.  If not, it's not the end of the world.

[deisik]

Will you stop deleting and re-posting? It's against the rules and annoying AF

I'm not sure which specific part of the rules it is against

As an aside, it is really pathetic when someone accuses you of using a "method" with which you allegedly boost your post count by not merging a few separated replies to different posts into a single one, and then someone else is not quite happy with you doing the exact opposite (i.e. merging your posts into one)

Kinda feels like spamming your watch list, doesn't it?

So it is now about spamming watch lists. Okay then, but I'm more interested in what you are still doing here, in this very thread. Haven't you already spent more time on this subject than it deserves?

Damn!  I don't know why deisik is getting hazed so hard in this thread, but man is this harsh

That's okay really

It just reveals what people are up to as such accusations are telling not much about myself as about the ones making them. But I find it amusing (to say the least) to actually see someone spending so much time and effort reading all that bullshit we were writing 5 years ago (release your inner Sherlock, huh). The insane amount of posts we had been submitting could actually be considered spam by today's standards but even back in the day I was far from being the most malicious spammer on the block

Deisik, I wouldn't worry about the account sale attempt from 2014, as I don't think anyone is going to go back that far to tag someone for account buying or selling--nor do I think they should.  It was a different time back then, and the account dealing situation wasn't the massive problem that it would turn out to be

It may in fact turn out to be a good thing in the end as it will show real intentions of some people here, and I could always use this thread for future reference once these pathetic attempts of throwing mud at me fail, which they will

As I said, I never considered deisik a shitposter.  He did crank out a huge number of posts in a short period of time, but as far as quality goes, I've seen much worse.  It is possible for someone to devote a tremendous amount of time to posting and in the process churn out 250 posts in a week and still manage to make most of them relatively decent.  I still don't think it's right to tag you for the amount of posts you made, but since it's  untrusted feedback, I would recommend just rolling with it and move on

It's an interesting topic in itself as it shows how primitive (and low) people really are

As an age-old wisdom goes, it is a sin to think bad of people but it is rarely a mistake. For example, quite a few people think that if someone makes 200 posts weekly, he is necessarily a spammer. But I can make 200 posts daily without a lot of effort if I'm in my element and find a worthy "drinking buddy", so to speak. If you are experienced in something and love your thing, you can talk about it all day long and likely attract a lot of listening ears (that's why I was barely making the required 15 posts in the Gambling section as I'm not much of a gambler). Imagine Satoshi Nakamoto comes back online and starts answering questions here 24/7

And technically, in the last few years it was only on a few rare occasions that I actually made like 200 posts a week and never made more than 250. I can easily prove that but as the burden of proof is on the one who accuses, I expected them to come up first with at least some evidence proving the opposite. Instead, they came up with the idea of me deleting my posts. But the irony is that I can just as easily present proof that it is no more than yet another unsubstantiated accusation. For example, I still have access to my Coinroll account where there is a log of my activity in the forum on a daily basis. My activity in the Stake.com signature campaign is pretty well documented too

Retaliatory feedback is usually not justified, btw.  Be the bigger person and maybe Lucius will cool down and reconsider. If not, it's not the end of the world

I agree that retaliatory feedback is not the right thing to do, which I stated in the OP myself. But as I was asking DT members to give negative rating to the offender, it started to look like I had been trying to hide behind their backs which is not a good thing, obviously. And I gave that dude a neutral rating anyway, so it is not strictly a retaliatory feedback, though they definitely deserve red paint on their chest, at least until they accept being flat-out wrong in this case

As such behavior destroys the purpose of the trust system and thus cannot be ignored if it is to be taken seriously