Negative rating

[Hudson-Odoi]

It seems I had received negative rating from someone on DT for being an alt of someone I don't know. I will just go ahead and state my case here because If I message the user directly, my messages will simply be brushed aside.

People seem to think my account is connect to other accounts that I'll list below.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2578585
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2580400
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2579977

Let me go ahead and evaluate the differences between my account and the others that it's claimed I'm associated with.


1) My account's username and it's meaning.

    Unlike the other accounts, it's clear for anyone who knows football that this username means something to me and isn't random as the usernames for the other users are. In the post linked below, I make a joke about England and the world cup, and I spoke of how I want an English team to win the UCL. That on itself means nothing but when you realize that my username was modeled from the name of a young English player then it's clear that some amount of thought went into my username as opposed to the others. If whoever I'm accused to be an alt of is a massive Chelsea and England fan as I am then it's okay to be suspicious but I'm sure that whoever I'm accused of being an alt of doesn't even watch the EPL.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5121365.msg50346921#msg50346921

2) Registration dates.

    If we look at the registration dates of the other accounts that I should be connected to, there are clear differences that should raise flags. Of the three other accounts, one was created on the 8th of April and the others were created on the 11th of April. My account on the other hand was created on the 26th of March.

3) Forum behaviour.

    If you take a look at the post history of the other users, you'll see that they only post in meta and reputation. I've actually made posts in other sections of the forum, showing the knowledge that I have in football, politics and society and I even attempted to launch a photoshop service in order to get some practice. If some reading is done into our posts then it's clear that there are differences in our writing styles.

As much as all the suspicion is stacked one way, the actual evidence is stacked completely opposite.

The accounts that I'm mentioned to be linked with seem to be linked back to one main account. If anyone know which country that person comes from then I'm more than willing to provide proof that I'm not that person by jumping on a skype video call. I'm from a very distinct part of the world and I'm willing to prove it to have my account cleared.

[nutildah]

OK so PM the people who tagged you and explain yourself to them. I guarantee you the rest of us don't care, nor can we do anything about it.

[Hudson-Odoi]

OK so PM the people who tagged you and explain yourself to them. I guarantee you the rest of us don't care, nor can we do anything about it.

If you don't care then why do you reply? The reason why this is a post and not a pm was clearly stated in the OP but in your haste to make posts to claim from your signature campaign I doubt that you actually read the post.

[Quickseller]

You have negative trust from Lauda. I would not expect for your concerns to be taken seriously.

Your best course of action is to create a new account and hide any connections to the account you are currently using.

[Bttzed03]

You may not be connected to those accounts you mentioned but this is an alt account right?

Or you are denying both?

[nutildah]

OK so PM the people who tagged you and explain yourself to them. I guarantee you the rest of us don't care, nor can we do anything about it.

If you don't care then why do you reply? The reason why this is a post and not a pm was clearly stated in the OP but in your haste to make posts to claim from your signature campaign I doubt that you actually read the post.

I've already well surpassed my post count for my campaign this week, thanks for inquiring. I was simply trying to help you, but after reading your other posts its quite evident you're only here to stir shit around. Don't worry, I won't be responding to you any further.

[Jet Cash]

>,,<

I looked at your post history to see if I could help, but you seem to be implying that I was lying over my McDonalds double spend, so you are on your own as far as I am concerned.

Why you think that I should lie over a petty amount of merit I don't understand. If I had the inclination to manipulate the merit system, I could make a much better job of it than that.

[Hudson-Odoi]

You have negative trust from Lauda. I would not expect for your concerns to be taken seriously.

Your best course of action is to create a new account and hide any connections to the account you are currently using.

Surely he must take this seriously considering the evidence outlined

[Quickseller]

You have negative trust from Lauda. I would not expect for your concerns to be taken seriously.

Your best course of action is to create a new account and hide any connections to the account you are currently using.

Surely he must take this seriously considering the evidence outlined

Thats a negative ghost rider.

He takes this thread seriously and ignores all evidence in your favor.

>,,<

I looked at your post history to see if I could help, but you seem to be implying that I was lying over my McDonalds double spend, so you are on your own as far as I am concerned.

Why you think that I should lie over a petty amount of merit I don't understand. If I had the inclination to manipulate the merit system, I could make a much better job of it than that.

I don't agree with what he was saying, but I don't think his concerns about the merited post were frivolous. Based on your post, it doesn't sound like you take even minor criticism very kindly.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Surely he must take this seriously considering the evidence outlined

Are you going to address the question as to whether your account is an alt?  You don't have to name your main accounts, but it would be nice if you'd disclose that you have at least one other account.

We already know the answer, but I'd like to hear it from you.  Newbies don't get involved in forum politics right away, even if they were lurking beforehand.  As far as the negative you received, there isn't much you can say that's going to change Lauda's mind.  Personally, I wouldn't give anyone a neg for malicious slandering of members here, but you went too far in Lauda's eyes. 

If you create a new account and spout the same bullshit, you can expect to get negged again--just like what probably happened with your main account(s).  Keep doing what you did, you'll keep getting what you got.

[Quickseller]

Surely he must take this seriously considering the evidence outlined

Are you going to address the question as to whether your account is an alt?  You don't have to name your main accounts, but it would be nice if you'd disclose that you have at least one other account.

I don't see how this is of any relevance to what the OP is saying. Especially considering that based on the rest of your post, you already have a preconceived answer, and will either call him a liar (and not credible) if he denies having another account, or will call him a sockpuppet (and again, not credible) if he says he does have another account.

We already know the answer, but I'd like to hear it from you

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't see how this is of any relevance to what the OP is saying.

I don't see why what you think matters in the least. **Edit: see here for a good explanation.** It's a simple question, and I'd like to hear his answer to it.  There have been a few accounts created recently, all making posts with themes very similar to cryptohunter and his posse.  

And yep, I strongly suspect OP is an alt account of one of those members.  If he denies he has an alt, he's a liar.  If he admits it, fine.  He's also free to dodge the question, but I'd question his motivation for doing so.  

[coolcoinz]

1) My account's username and it's meaning.

    Unlike the other accounts, it's clear for anyone who knows football that this username means something to me and isn't random as the usernames for the other users are. In the post linked below, I make a joke about England and the world cup, and I spoke of how I want an English team to win the UCL. That on itself means nothing but when you realize that my username was modeled from the name of a young English player then it's clear that some amount of thought went into my username as opposed to the others.

Maybe that's because your account was created first and was made to be the "main one". The sockpuppets came later (which is confirmed by the dadets of creation) and their names weren't so thoroughly thought through. Making 2 posts with a reference to football in a period of 3 weeks doesn't really change anything.

If whoever I'm accused to be an alt of is a massive Chelsea and England fan as I am then it's okay to be suspicious but I'm sure that whoever I'm accused of being an alt of doesn't even watch the EPL.

These accounts are too new and have too few posts to draw conclusions.

2) Registration dates.

    If we look at the registration dates of the other accounts that I should be connected to, there are clear differences that should raise flags. Of the three other accounts, one was created on the 8th of April and the others were created on the 11th of April. My account on the other hand was created on the 26th of March.

Too short of a timespan to use it as proof in your case. Who told you that all socks have to be registered on the same day?

3) Forum behaviour.

    If you take a look at the post history of the other users, you'll see (...)

Your post history is almost non-existent. There's not enough data to paint a picture.

[Quickseller]

I don't see how this is of any relevance to what the OP is saying.

I don't see why what you think matters in the least.  It's a simple question, and I'd like to hear his answer to it.  There have been a few accounts created recently, all making posts with themes very similar to cryptohunter and his posse. 

And yep, I strongly suspect OP is an alt account of one of those members.  If he denies he has an alt, he's a liar.  If he admits it, fine.  He's also free to dodge the question, but I'd question his motivation for doing so. 

I think I already accurately predicted the rationale for your asking the question:

will either call him a liar (and not credible) if he denies having another account, or will call him a sockpuppet (and again, not credible) if he says he does have another account

[...]posts with themes very similar to cryptohunter[...]If he denies he has an alt, he's a liar.[...]

I don't particularly like the mass newbies complaining, but I would suggest reading the content of what they are saying, instead of looking at who is making the statement. I find the use of mass newbies manipulative, but I also suspect the OP either fears for his "main" accounts reputation, or that he will be the subject of ad-hominem attacks (and his arguments will be ignored), or more likely, both.

[Lauda]

Where did you see me write that you are an alt account of the other accounts i.e. the same user behind all of them? Nowhere. Nothing to see here, nothing is going to change. You can try the same shenanigans with a new alt account, but I'll just tag you again. :shrug:

[bones261]

I don't particularly like the mass newbies complaining, but I would suggest reading the content of what they are saying, instead of looking at who is making the statement. I find the use of mass newbies manipulative, but I also suspect the OP either fears for his "main" accounts reputation, or that he will be the subject of ad-hominem attacks (and his arguments will be ignored), or more likely, both.

   I did read what the op had to say and it was much to my disliking. Here I am, reading upteen posts a day for over a year and giving merit to what I find merit worthy. Then I get the pleasure to read yet another conspiracy theory that merit sources are some kind of evil overlords, ranking up their "friends." Then when Jet Cash chimes in to state that he's basically doing the best that he can, this OP cherry picks Jet Cash's merit history and finds an outlier. Then the OP uses it to imply that Jet Cash is involved in "merit abuse." When people pointed out that Jet Cash posted the day it happened that it was a connection error, the OP implied that he was a liar.
   All I have to say is that it is getting rather wearisome having some people imply that us merit sources are directly involved in some kind oppressive power hungry plot. I for one am doing the best that I can and am trying to be as fair as I can.

[Vod]

  All I have to say is that it is getting rather wearisome having some people imply that us merit sources are directly involved in some kind oppressive power hungry plot. I for one am doing the best that I can and am trying to be as fair as I can.

Who cares what they imply?  Simply don't consider the posts from those who don't stand behind their words.  Give those posts the respect they deserve.

[Hudson-Odoi]

Surely he must take this seriously considering the evidence outlined

Are you going to address the question as to whether your account is an alt?  You don't have to name your main accounts, but it would be nice if you'd disclose that you have at least one other account.

We already know the answer, but I'd like to hear it from you.  Newbies don't get involved in forum politics right away, even if they were lurking beforehand.

I've been lurking for years, that's why i have a good understanding of what's going on here. The fact that I've only been lurking also shows up in the fact I don't even know who "Lauda" is even though she is regarded highly on here.

Where did you see me write that you are an alt account of the other accounts i.e. the same user behind all of them? Nowhere. Nothing to see here, nothing is going to change. You can try the same shenanigans with a new alt account, but I'll just tag you again. :shrug:

Except you quoted a thread that implies just that as the reference. Your authority goes unchecked doesn't it? because you don't even know what the reference you but for a trust rating there and that's basic stuff