PM from admin demanding to exclude a certain user

[suchmoon]

Since the "Lauda PM" is now public knowledge let me just state that this sort of thing - forum owner/admin sending a PM demanding "recommending" to exclude a certain user from my trust network - is deeply unwelcome. Theymos can blacklist anyone he wants, there is no need for him to coerce others into doing this. At the very least this call for action should have been done publicly. I want to put this out in case anyone wants to exclude (or blacklist  ) me for this opinion.

If you're not quite familiar with the events, please read cryptodevil's excellent write-up.

Not sure if this is more a Meta topic or a Reputation topic, feel free to move as appropriate.

[1714853066]

1714853066

[1714853066]

1714853066

[1714853066]

1714853066

[owlcatz]

Since the "Lauda PM" is now public knowledge let me just state that this sort of thing - forum owner/admin sending PMs demanding to exclude certain users from my trust network - is deeply unwelcome. Theymos can blacklist anyone he wants, there is no need for him to coerce others into doing this. At the very least this should have been done publicly. I want to put this out in case anyone wants to exclude (or blacklist  ) me for this opinion.

Not sure if this is more a Meta topic or a Reputation topic, feel free to move as appropriate.

No, I and quite a few others agree with you. It makes no sense really. I mean, PM'ing users to exclude lauda over a "mistake" made on Quickscammer's flag? Fuck that.... Not right... Deleted the PM.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Decided to ask advice from a couple of OG DT1’s. Was told to ignore it so I did

[El duderino_]

Since the "Lauda PM" is now public knowledge let me just state that this sort of thing - forum owner/admin sending PMs demanding to exclude certain users from my trust network - is deeply unwelcome. Theymos can blacklist anyone he wants, there is no need for him to coerce others into doing this. At the very least this call for action should have been done publicly. I want to put this out in case anyone wants to exclude (or blacklist  ) me for this opinion.

Not sure if this is more a Meta topic or a Reputation topic, feel free to move as appropriate.

I do understand what you are saying, just a PM with fact would be OK imo and wouldn't be a problem so each member can make there ow mind on a given FACT...

Still what happens here is an exact same example as Lauda doing a similar thing not long ago, with asking other DT members to trust or distrust people...  

Same no go, if you wanna point something to members to make sure they don't miss it in the forum could be OK, just let the reading party make up there own mind whiteout any pressure from no-one

[Quickseller]

Perhaps he should just blacklist anyone who keeps lauda in their trust list.

He was trying to convince others to agree with him.

[otrkid1970]

Since the "Lauda PM" is now public knowledge let me just state that this sort of thing - forum owner/admin sending PMs demanding to exclude certain users from my trust network - is deeply unwelcome. Theymos can blacklist anyone he wants, there is no need for him to coerce others into doing this. At the very least this should have been done publicly. I want to put this out in case anyone wants to exclude (or blacklist  ) me for this opinion.

Not sure if this is more a Meta topic or a Reputation topic, feel free to move as appropriate.

No, I and quite a few others agree with you. It makes no sense really. I mean, PM'ing users to exclude lauda over a "mistake" made on Quickscammer's flag? Fuck that.... Not right... Deleted the PM.

So with this logic i can plagiarize and get banned and claim it was a mistake and i can be unbanned?  I mean the rules were clearly posted by theymos.  Was not a mistake Lauda has been on "It's" high horse forever thinking IT can get away with anything.

[Lauda]

He was trying to convince others to agree with him.

The flag-type is wrong. I have advised others to use flag-type 1 and successfully convinced a lot of people to support it.

[suchmoon]

Just to make it clear: I obviously don't mind theymos expressing his opinion, I appreciate it. I dislike the way it was done. He can blacklist users (and preferably explain the decision) if he wants to. Or post his opinion publicly and let everyone make their decisions.

And no, it's not the same as someone else (e.g. Lauda) campaigning for inclusions/exclusions. I could tell Lauda to fuck off and nothing would happen regardless of what the conspiracy theories would lead you to believe. I don't think many recipients of that PM would feel the same way about a request from admin. Perhaps my reading of the situation is flawed. Let's hope that's all there is.

[Lauda]

And no, it's not the same as someone else (e.g. Lauda) campaigning for inclusions/exclusions. I could tell Lauda to fuck off and nothing would happen regardless of what the conspiracy theories would lead you to believe. I don't think many recipients of that PM would feel the same way about a request from admin. Perhaps my reading of the situation is flawed. Let's hope that's all there is.

Let's see where all those users are which claim that others act when I PM them only because they are afraid of me. This must be taken to the next-level if the admin PMs you then, no? In comparison to a swift blacklist and authority-figure, I have zero power here.

[SaltySpitoon]

Let's see where all those users are which claim that others act when I PM them only because they are afraid of me. This must be taken to the next-level if the admin PMs you then, no? In comparison to a swift blacklist and authority-figure, I have zero power here.

Just to make it clear: I obviously don't mind theymos expressing his opinion, I appreciate it. I dislike the way it was done. He can blacklist users (and preferably explain the decision) if he wants to. Or post his opinion publicly and let everyone make their decisions.

And no, it's not the same as someone else (e.g. Lauda) campaigning for inclusions/exclusions. I could tell Lauda to fuck off and nothing would happen regardless of what the conspiracy theories would lead you to believe. I don't think many recipients of that PM would feel the same way about a request from admin. Perhaps my reading of the situation is flawed. Let's hope that's all there is.

You can tell Theymos to fuck off too if you want. He doesn't take it too personal.

[tmfp]

Since the "Lauda PM" is now public knowledge let me just state that this sort of thing - forum owner/admin sending PMs demanding to exclude certain users from my trust network - is deeply unwelcome. Theymos can blacklist anyone he wants, there is no need for him to coerce others into doing this. At the very least this call for action should have been done publicly. I want to put this out in case anyone wants to exclude (or blacklist  ) me for this opinion.

Theymos' pm to me contained a recommendation, not a demand, and I'll treat it as such.

[Lauda]

Let's see where all those users are which claim that others act when I PM them only because they are afraid of me. This must be taken to the next-level if the admin PMs you then, no? In comparison to a swift blacklist and authority-figure, I have zero power here.

Just to make it clear: I obviously don't mind theymos expressing his opinion, I appreciate it. I dislike the way it was done. He can blacklist users (and preferably explain the decision) if he wants to. Or post his opinion publicly and let everyone make their decisions.

And no, it's not the same as someone else (e.g. Lauda) campaigning for inclusions/exclusions. I could tell Lauda to fuck off and nothing would happen regardless of what the conspiracy theories would lead you to believe. I don't think many recipients of that PM would feel the same way about a request from admin. Perhaps my reading of the situation is flawed. Let's hope that's all there is.

You can tell Theymos to fuck off too if you want. He doesn't take it too personal.

Are you sure that all users know that? Are you sure that all those users are not afraid of authorities?

[Last of the V8s]

certain users

Your pm was about more than one user, or is this just a turn of phrase?

[SaltySpitoon]

Are you sure that all users know that? Are you sure that all those users are not afraid of authorities?

Nope, but I also don't know that all users are not afraid of ducks either. This is pretty much the same thing I said when people were complaining about you "bullying" others. People are free to ignore anyone they want whether its a random newbie, a legendary account, a DT1 account, or an admin (can't ignore admins about rule breaking I suppose). If you don't know that, that isn't the admin, your, or the duck's fault.

[Lauda]

Are you sure that all users know that? Are you sure that all those users are not afraid of authorities?

Nope, but I also don't know that all users are not afraid of ducks either. This is pretty much the same thing I said when people were complaining about you "bullying" others. People are free to ignore anyone they want whether its a random newbie, a legendary account, a DT1 account, or an admin (can't ignore admins about rule breaking I suppose). If you don't know that, that isn't the admin, your, or duck's fault.

Fair point. I would however, at this point question the trustworthiness and honesty of anyone who cried "bullying" about me but does not do the same now regarding this PM.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Perhaps he should just blacklist anyone who keeps lauda in their trust list.

He was trying to convince others to agree with him.

My teeth are grinding.

My teeth are grinding.

Did I mention that my teeth....

I'm sitting on this for the moment, as it's an unprecedented request since I've been a member here.  I've always thought Lauda did more good than harm, and I've had a fair amount of loyalty to him/her since before my DT days because of support I received.  Lauda was definitely impulsive today with the exclusions over the bill gator thing and the QS flag. 

Lauda, I'm going to do nothing but sit on my hands right now and see how this crap goes down.  I may step away from the keyboard for a while after this as well. 

I did support someone else's flag referencing QS's escrow shenanigans, so that one I felt justified in getting behind.  The friggin' highlight of my day right there, sorry QS.

[redsn0w]

Lauda said:

The system is terrible. Other's have followed in blindly on that flag not knowing/understanding the full stupidity of the system (or just for the sake of testing - see yahoo's post) at the time. I wasn't sure of how bad the implications of it either, i.e. it's much more worse than I originally thought. Now that that has sorted (there is no support on the flag), it's all good. I'm fine with a blacklist if mr. theymos wants to. All flags created after that are fully valid; maybe only not the flag on BSV.

You literally asked to be removed, didn't you?

[Anduck]

I agree with the general sentiment of suchmoon and others here. Especially now when this new flag thing was implemented, it isn't surprising to see it being accidentally misused or problematic at this point. Also, I would not go distrust Lauda solely because Lauda really just made a negative flag about Quickseller, regardless of whatever was incorrect or bad in the flag.

[Lauda]

Lauda said:

The system is terrible. Other's have followed in blindly on that flag not knowing/understanding the full stupidity of the system (or just for the sake of testing - see yahoo's post) at the time. I wasn't sure of how bad the implications of it either, i.e. it's much more worse than I originally thought. Now that that has sorted (there is no support on the flag), it's all good. I'm fine with a blacklist if mr. theymos wants to. All flags created after that are fully valid; maybe only not the flag on BSV.

You literally asked to me removed, didn't you?

I did not ask for anything. I said that I'd accept it for the greater good or as proof of fake-decentralization.

[redsn0w]

Lauda said:

The system is terrible. Other's have followed in blindly on that flag not knowing/understanding the full stupidity of the system (or just for the sake of testing - see yahoo's post) at the time. I wasn't sure of how bad the implications of it either, i.e. it's much more worse than I originally thought. Now that that has sorted (there is no support on the flag), it's all good. I'm fine with a blacklist if mr. theymos wants to. All flags created after that are fully valid; maybe only not the flag on BSV.

You literally asked to me removed, didn't you?

I did not ask for anything. I said that I'd accept it for the greater good or as proof of fake-decentralization.

Ah ok, I was just asking.
No problem for me, thanks.