What's wrong with Vod, and Hhampuz

[bill gator]

Pointless

The point of you exclaiming you're blocking my PM's is what exactly?

[Lauda]

The point of you exclaiming you're blocking my PM's is what exactly?

You're not worth listening to, wind changes its direction all the time.

[Vod]

The point of you exclaiming you're blocking my PM's is what exactly?

For me, it was to avoid the taunting.   Then like a child, you posted the taunts publicly.  

You're bought.  

[bill gator]

You're not worth listening to

Somehow I'm worth responding to, and making it publicly known that you will no longer accept my PMs.
Despite the fact that none of it involves you.

For me, it was to avoid the taunting.

At least your response is relevant to the conversation.
You claimed I lied. I politely asked you about what.
Which part of that is taunting?

You lied in your feedback.

You're bought.  

Another assertion that I'm assuming you're unwilling to explain or justify.

[Vod]

For me, it was to avoid the taunting.

And you continue, so on ignore you go.   

Do whatever you want, just don't piss on me and call it rain. 

[bill gator]

You're hurling ad-hominem attacks, making baseless assertions that you're unwilling to explain, back-up or justify, but somehow I am the one taunting.
These re-caps keep looking more ridiculous.

Vod says I Lied
Ask what
Vod says TAUNTING!
Ask how I taunted
Vod says TAUNTING!

If we're going to be against virtue-signaling can we also be against the victimhood-mentality being expressed here?

I think you've made up your mind.  

The situation is actively developing, and all I can do is draw conclusions based on what I have in front of me. I wouldn't have reached out to you, and offered to change my feedback if I was already set-in-stone about how I feel here.

[Quickseller]

Pointless

The point of you exclaiming you're blocking my PM's is what exactly?

Me thinks he wants to virtue signal 

This thread is a very good example of what is wrong with the trust system.

[Vod]

Pointless

The point of you exclaiming you're blocking my PM's is what exactly?

Me thinks he wants to virtue signal 

This thread is a very good example of what is wrong with the trust system.

Agreed.  Why do we allow people with almost 5 digit negative trust on here ?

[TMAN]

Bill you just wind people up, you did it with me when I had you excluded initially, you are like some clingy bird you can’t get rid off. Dude just chill, if you didn’t really care about DT you wouldn’t be banging on like when my Mrs was pregnant and I had to go to the fucking shop in the middle of the night to get some specific ice cream. Like seriously dude, you got issues.

Yes vod was a cunt, yes vod realises and removed DOX. Now unheard of levels of cuntness is going on between OG and VOD. But dude what does your tag achieve? And now this fucking stalking is making it worse

[actmyname]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5141263.0This thread has gone on far too long. It's still holding onto life in a fetid septic chamber echoing a cacophony of distorted rebounding rhetoric.

btcsmlcmnr would you kindly lock this?

[OgNasty]

Yes vod was a cunt, yes vod realises and removed DOX. Now unheard of levels of cuntness is going on between OG and VOD. But dude what does your tag achieve? And now this fucking stalking is making it worse

Are you serious?  Vod absolutely deserves the negative trust feedback for his behavior.  That isn't up for dispute.  Your post does a nice job of showing some merit source abuse though.  Thanks for the addition to the thread.

[ibminer]

His feedback is nothing more than illegitimate negative trust. 500 Risked BTC when no trade happened? 

[bill gator]

His feedback is nothing more than illegitimate negative trust. 500 Risked BTC when no trade happened?  

I didn't claim there was a trade that occurred. I claimed that 500 BTC were at risk, which they are; especially if the information supplied within the DOX was accurate. Have you been reading along?
Besides, theymos himself has said something like "if you want to make a trust-rating more effective, increase the BTC risked"; this is not what I am doing here, but that does not make the feedback illegitimate in anyway.. It never has.

Bill you just wind people up,

Don't tell me you think offering to change my feedback once the inaccuracies are pointed out is "taunting", too?

you are like some clingy bird you can’t get rid off.

I just love you guys so much <3

Dude just chill, if you didn’t really care about DT ...

I care about our forum, our community, Bitcoin, the trust-system (or whatever replaces/supersedes it), I care about the interactions around here making sense and I care about principals that I assumed we all operated by. I do not give a shit to be on DT, but now that I've stuck my nose in a Reputation thread... Can not unsee... You folks are bonkers.

dude what does your tag achieve? And now this fucking stalking is making it worse

As far as I know, my tag is the only DT1 tag that stands on Vod. Don't you think that DT1 should do something when a user does something like this? We are not God, so sometimes it takes more than repentance to atone for our sins. I don't know what you mean about stalking; I read along, asked some questions, slept on it, drew conclusions and then left an appropriate feedback for the situation.

Then there was discussions about trust-list changes, which I had relevant anecdotes to share, then I was accused of lying so I tried to figure out what I was being accused of lying about with a single, polite PM.

[Vod]

OG absolutely deserves to lose his house over his scam.  That isn't up for dispute.

[TMAN]

btcsmlcmnr would you kindly lock this?

Please do not - these two are big enough and ugly enough to sort there own battle online, surely its best if everyone else stops posting (me included) and we let them get to it in one place, itll keep happening in every other fucking thread if not

[ibminer]

I didn't claim there was a trade that occurred. I claimed that 500 BTC were at risk, which they are; especially if the information supplied within the DOX was accurate. Have you been reading along?

I can tell by your ridiculous "re-cap" that you haven't been following along at all.

I can also tell you don't know how to use the trust system.

- "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.

[Vod]

His feedback is nothing more than illegitimate negative trust. 500 Risked BTC when no trade happened? 

Thanks for this.  Liars have no place on DT1.

[bill gator]

you don't know how to use the trust system.

As you literally cherry-pick a post from theymos, that directly contradicts what you're suggesting for the trust-system.

This is literally from the same post you just quoted :

- If you want to make a rating stronger, increase "Risked BTC". 50 extra risked BTC is equivalent to an additional rating.

Oh, and if you'd be a darling - providing your own re-cap would be some much needed comedic relief, so long as you don't butcher the delivery like Lauda did earlier about merit being based on effort.

Liars

We're all still waiting to hear what the lie is. I'm still standing by to correct myself if this is proven to be the case.

I agree with TMAN. Leave it to them to solve, I'm open to adjusting and changing my feedback/actions/conclusions - as always.

[TMAN]

As far as I know, my tag is the only DT1 tag that stands on Vod.

Because Vod fucked up and sorted it straight away, Vod does some decent shit here tagging people and OG has convinced many people he does decent things here as well.



So leave them to it, go change the tampon and powder your nose till you get your emotions in check and let the two titans fight it out - its none of our business getting in the middle and when it all settles down then tag away with a proper reference and not by saying that vod skammed anyone for 500BTC you penis.

[actmyname]

Is the only problem that of the 500 BTC risked amount?

Because AFAIK few people have problems with substantiating ratings based on outsider insight (i.e. not being part of the transaction).