Total corruption in Russian local [DT involved!]

[KTChampions]

REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.

Is this something thats allowed here ?

If this is true then why DTs from Russian section didn't neg him?

We had seen lot of negs in the previous days even for the suspicion but offering such kind of services are completely untrustworthy behaviour.

Check the first post of this thread and opinions of some DT members - chimik, taikuri13, Alex_Sr.
Corruption.

[Findingnemo]

REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.

Is this something thats allowed here ?

If this is true then why DTs from Russian section didn't neg him?

We had seen lot of negs in the previous days even for the suspicion but offering such kind of services are completely untrustworthy behaviour.

Check the first post of this thread and opinions of some DT members - chimik, taikuri13, Alex_Sr.
Corruption.

We have 100s of other DT members so bring this into their attention by creating a thread in Reputation which might get more healthy discussion.

[xtraelv]

Your explaination about your personal bheviours looks decent to me, I don't think you did something wrong in giving merits to the banned users as it is not displayed clearly on the forum. But there is no explanation about smartman being trustworthy in any sense, if you see he has clearly tried to spam the forum by offering this services.

REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.

Is this something thats allowed here ?

The ratings did all end up being removed, which I'm happy with, and I appreciate the willingness to de-escalate and forgive from the people involved in this case. The fact that this issue came up at all indicates that the trust system isn't working perfectly (and I am considering future system changes), but it's still a good outcome.

And the trust system is only going to work if there's some level of forgiveness and de-escalation.

Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.

Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.

This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.

Perhaps the guidance from Theymos (The forum administrator)  answers your question.

[chimk]

Your explaination about your personal bheviours looks decent to me, I don't think you did something wrong in giving merits to the banned users as it is not displayed clearly on the forum. But there is no explanation about smartman being trustworthy in any sense, if you see he has clearly tried to spam the forum by offering this services.

REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.

Is this something thats allowed here ?

I don't like point number 5. But I need proof that it was used and how it was used. Without this data, I can not draw conclusions in this case. I wrote about this in detail for one DT1 member.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5105163.msg51458554#msg51458554

Item number 3. It depends on the nature of the content. If there is no spam, plagiarism, deception, this is not a violation. They can be project participants, testing it and asking questions. I can not be sure of this and can not prove otherwise.

The issue of having multiple accounts has been discussed in the Russian section many times. You need to know how these accounts are obtained and how they are used. I was surprised to learn that the user does not receive a negative trust due to the participation of several accounts in different bounty. I asked DT members if it’s enough for a negative trust, user interest in buying or selling an account, or for his loyalty to it? We discussed for a long time, I heard a lot of opinions that to destroy trust based only on this is not correct. Therefore, in this case, if the user claims that his service was used constructively, I will not be able to refute.

If I interrupt my interaction with users on the basis of suspicion or demand crystal clear purity, I can lose most of the useful content. In life it happens, it seems that I am 100% sure, and then it turns out that I was mistaken. Need proof. How many spam reports did this service receive? No answer. Deadlock ...

[xtraelv]

If I interrupt my interaction with users on the basis of suspicion or demand crystal clear purity, I can lose most of the useful content. In life it happens, it seems that I am 100% sure, and then it turns out that I was mistaken. Need proof. How many spam reports did this service receive? No answer. Deadlock ...

Theymos specifically stated that is is not appropriate to neg-trust spammers:

129 users who were wearing a yobit signature and had at least 1 good report against them in the last 14 days are banned for 14 days. All yobit signatures are wiped. Signatures containing "yobit.net" are banned for 60 days.

Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.

As much as I hate spam and disapprove of account farmers there have been massive changes made to the DT system, trust system and how scammers are flagged.

Theymos made it very clear that he was unhappy about the way the trust system was being used.

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.

[KTChampions]

I am stating a fact: xtraelv was unable to continue the conversation about specific facts and just ignores my last message in our discussion. 
He is also trying to divert the conversation towards discussing the case with Yobit (and members of its signature campaign accused of spam) - which is irrelevant to our topic.

Another fact: chimik can not answer simple questions posed to him in this message.
But he continues to defend the scamer and refusing to acknowledge the fact: Offering "ICO bumping" services, also known as paid shill bumping. This is a highly shady offer which helps generate fake buzz for various projects.

[xtraelv]

When hero member tema send merits only to abusers and Smart man its ok?
When I described in detail who sent merit, where, it is not specific data that are proof? I showed a lot of abusers who act on one pattern. This is specific data that is evidence of abuse.

Users have no control over where they  RECEIVE merit from. The biggest scammer can send you a ton of merit and there is nothing that YOU can do to stop it. Unless there is proof that it was elicited you cannot use it as evidence against someone. There has been massive discussions about this when merit was introduced. EDUCATE YOURSELF

You do not need to do any research. Smart man himself writes that he worked with this project and that he learned that this project was scam. But he did not warn anyone about this.
Is this not complicity in crime?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5105163.msg51411806#msg51411806

In the link you posted he explained himself. He withdrew from the project and even publicly stated that he thought it was a scam.

To me it indicates that he got involved with something he disagreed with, left and was transparent about it. It does not make me think that he is an intentional scammer.

What is the name of hiring workers with multiple accounts for bumping a thread and providing this kind of service?
Evidence of these actions is in the first message.

Theymos said:

Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.

What part of that is unclear to you ?

I am stating a fact: xtraelv was unable to continue the conversation about specific facts and just ignores my last message in our discussion.  
He is also trying to divert the conversation towards discussing the case with Yobit (and members of its signature campaign accused of spam) - which is irrelevant to our topic.

When you post a reply I do not have an obligation to immediately reply.

Your responses are weak, petty, obtuse, self-entitled and personal. You fail to provide sufficient proof of even some of your most basic accusations - I see absolutely no pattern of large scale corruption.  I believe you are a victim of the Dunning–Kruger effect. The fact that you have provided very weak evidence and now are resorting to personal attacks makes me view you as untrustworthy. Sorry that you didn't find the echo chamber that you were looking for.


Discussion about acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Community values. DT

[IMadeYouReadThis]

3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions.

Item number 3. It depends on the nature of the content. If there is no spam, plagiarism, deception, this is not a violation. They can be project participants, testing it and asking questions. I can not be sure of this and can not prove otherwise.

This looks like a clear cut paid shill pumping services from random accounts for random ICOs. It is also shown clearly from the quoted messages above, presenting it as an testing system or something like asking questions does not look acceptable IMO.

Still its your own choice of giving neg trust for it, but atleast you should have not protected a clear cut spam promoter smartman.

After reading some comments from Theymos, I think his views are good guidelines in using the trust system and I can see he is on an total opposition of giving neg feedbacks for spamming. And your arguments too look correct after looking at the moto of the new trust system explained by him.

I too think much clerification is needed for leavings trust ratings on such stuff.

We have 100s of other DT members so bring this into their attention by creating a thread in Reputation which might get more healthy discussion.

This looks like a great advice for you @KTChampions or just move this topic there if possible.

[suchmoon]

you should have not protected a clear cut spam promoter smartman.

I'm guessing this is a bit of a translation issue - you and KTChampion keep repeating "protection" when you're talking about someone disagreeing with you.

[Alex_Sr]

I'm guessing this is a bit of a translation issue - you and KTChampion keep repeating "protection" when you're talking about someone disagreeing with you.

In Russian it is called "Boring fairy tale" - a fairy tale with recursion effect. (Дoкyчнaя cкaзкa). They think that if you repeat the same argument dozens of times, it will become more powerful.

"Tell a story about a white bull?" ("Paccкaзaть cкaзкy пpo бeлoгo бычкa?") - All dialogues with them are reduced to it!

[madnessteat]

KTChampions I have nothing personal against you and I treat you in a neutral manner, just like other users of this forum. I don't want to offend you, but your investigation without the necessary evidence looks ridiculous.

You try to accuse many worthy users of the Russian locale of corruption. See if you think these users are worthy because they do useful things for the forum, not just trolling or writing meaningless messages.

Doesn't it seem to you that trying to connect me with esmanthra is ridiculous? You, as a native speaker of the language, should easily distinguish my manner of communication from that of esmanthra. Changing your password in one day is just a coincidence.

Up rank from Newbie to Sr. Member - 7 users
esmanthra - 3/18/2018 3:43:13 AM password changed
~
madnessteat - 3/18/2018 7:47:50 AM password changed
~

I have had this account from the very beginning. When I created my account, I didn't even think I would stay in the forum for long. So later I changed my password to a more complex one.

 

[johhnyUA]

Your responses are weak, petty, obtuse, self-entitled and personal. You fail to provide sufficient proof of even some of your most basic accusations - I see absolutely no pattern of large scale corruption.  I believe you are a victim of the Dunning–Kruger effect. The fact that you have provided very weak evidence and now are resorting to personal attacks makes me view you as untrustworthy. Sorry that you didn't find the echo chamber that you were looking for.

It's just our well known local board troll.
For example: He has created topic and called  it "BTC founder (Satoshi means) about Btc..." (russian version - "Coздaтeль биткoинa o BTC"). Of course, topic was about Craig's Wright declaration. He has ignored my post with clarification about this issue (with official announcement from USA Copyright Office) and keep trolling that Craig Wright == Satoshi.

[KTChampions]

xtraelv

1.) Yes. But when a huge number of abusers send merit to one user it is obvious merit abuse.
And what can you say about tema? He sent merit only to abusers (as I showed in detail). Is this behavior trustworthy?

2.)

In the link you posted he explained himself. He withdrew from the project and even publicly stated that he thought it was a scam.

To me it indicates that he got involved with something he disagreed with, left and was transparent about it. It does not make me think that he is an intentional scammer.

Why you want to believe in words but not in facts?
He collaborated with the project and received money from it. He knew that this project was scam. He was silent about it.
He confessed that he had collaborated with the project and knew that it was a scam only after he received accusations of fraud - only 1 year later from the project started. Fraudsters had a lot of time to deceive people.
Smart man is a scamer. It is facts not just words.

3.) Why did you miss this item? I showed many alt accounts of Smart man and gave you examples of their fraudulent behavior.
Do you want to continue the dispute on this point or agree that here he is a scamer?

4.)

What is the name of hiring workers with multiple accounts for bumping a thread and providing this kind of service?
Evidence of these actions is in the first message.

Theymos said:

Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.

What part of that is unclear to you ?

When I talk about spam you say there is no evidence. When I talk about bumping, you say that spam is not prohibited (according to Teymos).
Do you seriously think that I will not see this juggling?  

Alex_Sr
Why do you run away from discussing the facts? We started the discussion point by point, but you are trying to escape.
Since you are defending a scamer, then continue doing so, or acknowledge the fallacy of your behavior.

KTChampions I have nothing personal against you and I treat you in a neutral manner, just like other users of this forum. I don't want to offend you, but your investigation without the necessary evidence looks ridiculous.

You try to accuse many worthy users of the Russian locale of corruption. See if you think these users are worthy because they do useful things for the forum, not just trolling or writing meaningless messages.

Have you read the thread?
So 4 questions for you:

1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

Doesn't it seem to you that trying to connect me with esmanthra is ridiculous? You, as a native speaker of the language, should easily distinguish my manner of communication from that of esmanthra. Changing your password in one day is just a coincidence.

When I see a person calling black white, I (naturally) become suspicious of him.

It's just our well known local board troll.
~

What an interesting story! I will not even discuss this lie.
I prefer to talk about the facts that are discussed in the subject, so 4 questions for you:

1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

4 all
Another remarkable evidence of Smart man's fraudulent behavior (thanks to attentive users!):

Approximately 60$?

I can say so, plus or minus 65 at the price of ETH.

He discusses the price of accounts with the famous ru account seller.

[xtraelv]

3.) Why did you miss this item? I showed many alt accounts of Smart man and gave you examples of their fraudulent behavior.
Do you want to continue the dispute on this point or agree that here he is a scamer?

I did not miss 3

You are confused by your own numbering system.

Number 2 was discussing alts. It was such a mess that it was unclear what you wanted.

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

Approximately 60$?

I can say so, plus or minus 65 at the price of ETH.

He discusses the price of accounts with the famous ru account seller.

While I seriously dislike the sale of accounts Theymos has been quite clear about using trust to censor discussions.

If he had actually offered to sell someone an account it would be different.

 It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them.

Generally I only tag seller or buyer accounts if they have been stolen, hacked or used for deliberate proven scamming with concrete evidence. Discussing something that I disapprove of is not generally something that I will tag someone for. It is effectively censoring speech. This forum is build very much on libertarian ideals which values freedom of speech.

Disagreeing with the content of the speech but protecting the right to say it.

18. Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.

[madnessteat]

Have you read the thread?
So 4 questions for you:
Quote
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

I can't answer any of these questions "yes" as I only make decisions about any user if I'm 100% sure I'm right. There is simply no hard evidence and if there isn't, you can easily make a mistake.

When I see a person calling black white, I (naturally) become suspicious of him.

A few years ago I had to communicate with people who had mental disorders (Schizophrenia). One of them was always walking with the Bible and waving a cross in front of everybody, he once told me he was in constant contact with God and the devil. But as long as there is no proof of that, it can't be true. I don't compare you to one of these people, you're smart enough, but you just don't have enough evidence. I have another account, but it has one message and no merit. And I am 100% sure of that. So linking me to esmanthra is not a good idea. Read my early translations, esmanthra there constantly scolded me for the quality of translations for which I am still ashamed.

[KTChampions]

xtraelv

If you answered point by point, as I do, there would be no confusion.
Let's continue.

1.) I do not see your answer to this point, so I repeat my question:

But when a huge number of abusers send merit to one user it is obvious merit abuse.
And what can you say about tema? He sent merit only to abusers (as I showed in detail). Is this behavior trustworthy?

2.)

Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?

I showed his alts and their behavior here and here
Any objections or do you agree?

3.) I do not see your answer to this point, so I repeat my question:

In the link you posted he explained himself. He withdrew from the project and even publicly stated that he thought it was a scam.

To me it indicates that he got involved with something he disagreed with, left and was transparent about it. It does not make me think that he is an intentional scammer.

Why you want to believe in words but not in facts?
He collaborated with the project and received money from it. He knew that this project was scam. He was silent about it.
He confessed that he had collaborated with the project and knew that it was a scam only after he received accusations of fraud - only 1 year later from the project started. Fraudsters had a lot of time to deceive people.
Smart man is a scamer. It is facts not just words.

Any objections or do you agree?

4.)

Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

Same:

When I talk about spam you say there is no evidence. When I talk about bumping, you say that spam is not prohibited (according to Teymos).
Do you seriously think that I will not see this juggling?  

Can you answer without juggling? Did Smart man hire people in the bumping service and did he offer such services?
The value of posts that are written for one purpose - the thread bump will be discussed later.

Have you read the thread?
So 4 questions for you:
Quote
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

I can't answer any of these questions "yes" as I only make decisions about any user if I'm 100% sure I'm right. There is simply no hard evidence and if there isn't, you can easily make a mistake.

Wow! 
What a great post! How many arguments!
So... After you defended the scamer, you can’t say anything smarter than “I don't know”? Even after I showed specific facts and you just have to think about them? 

[xtraelv]

xtraelv

If you answered point by point, as I do, there would be no confusion.
Let's continue.

1.) I do not see your answer to this point, so I repeat my question:

But when a huge number of abusers send merit to one user it is obvious merit abuse.
And what can you say about tema? He sent merit only to abusers (as I showed in detail). Is this behavior trustworthy?

2.)

Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?

I showed his alts and their behavior here and here
Any objections or do you agree?

3.) I do not see your answer to this point, so I repeat my question:

In the link you posted he explained himself. He withdrew from the project and even publicly stated that he thought it was a scam.

To me it indicates that he got involved with something he disagreed with, left and was transparent about it. It does not make me think that he is an intentional scammer.

Why you want to believe in words but not in facts?
He collaborated with the project and received money from it. He knew that this project was scam. He was silent about it.
He confessed that he had collaborated with the project and knew that it was a scam only after he received accusations of fraud - only 1 year later from the project started. Fraudsters had a lot of time to deceive people.
Smart man is a scamer. It is facts not just words.

Any objections or do you agree?

4.)

Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

Same:

When I talk about spam you say there is no evidence. When I talk about bumping, you say that spam is not prohibited (according to Teymos).
Do you seriously think that I will not see this juggling?  

Can you answer without juggling? Did Smart man hire people in the bumping service and did he offer such services?
The value of posts that are written for one purpose - the thread bump will be discussed later.

Have you read the thread?
So 4 questions for you:
Quote
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?

I can't answer any of these questions "yes" as I only make decisions about any user if I'm 100% sure I'm right. There is simply no hard evidence and if there isn't, you can easily make a mistake.

Wow!  
What a great post! How many arguments!
So... After you defended the scamer, you can’t say anything smarter than “I don't know”? Even after I showed specific facts and you just have to think about them?  

1) I fail to see the direct correlation between tema and Total corruption in Russian local  involving DTs.

If you have a problem with Tema then open a thread in reputation about it.

2) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

3) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

4) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

Nobody is defending a scammer.

Considering the guidance from Theymos (forum admin) and Mprep (Global moderator) I have pointed out the rules and guidance regarding trust and the rules.

Nothing that you have said has convinced me that there is Total corruption in Russian local  involving DTs. Based on the lack of evidence that you have provided makes me conclude that you do not have such evidence.

If you want to discuss individual transgressions then there is the reputation board for that.

What I have found over time is that there are a number of relatively new users that come to the forum and decide that they are self appointed judge, jury and executioner and like a zealot have a strict and uncompromising view of the world. Everyone else is wrong and they are right.

People come to this forum to talk about bitcoin, blockchain, altcoins and shitcoins. People have different opinions and some of them conflict with my ethical views. People don't come to the bitcointalk forum to be harassed or punished for every potential transgression or perceived slight. There is an unfortunate culture of toxicity that puts off people from visiting this forum.

Nobody is saying Smart man is faultless. It is just that they are not comfortable that the threshold is met where they feel comfortable placing negative trust. Something that you have not done yourself.

There are a number of DTs that in the past have taken uncompromising views on some of these issues. Several of them have been removed or publicly reprimanded for taking such uncompromising views.

Theymos has made it quite clear that he is unhappy about how DT was run in the past and wants more moderate actions.

You should give these ratings for anything which you think would impact someone's willingness to trade with the person, but you should not use trust ratings to attack a person's opinions or otherwise talk about things which would not be relevant to reasonable prospective traders.

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.

We have so many threads like this nowadays, people twerking for merits.

There are a lot of pointless "summarize something obvious" posts, but IMO btcsmlcmnr's summary added something.
Forgiveness and de-escalation are key to getting Trust working smoothly:
 - Forgiveness: Often people make fairly small mistakes, but then they seemingly get red-trusted for life. This isn't really fair, and it discourages participation due to paranoia: if you think that you have a 1% chance of running afoul of some unwritten rule and getting red-trusted for life, you might just avoid the marketplace altogether. Red trust should mostly be based on an evaluation of what the person is likely to do in the future moreso than a punishment/mark-of-shame.
 - De-escalation: If some people end up locked in a feud where they're only really giving negative trust to each other in retaliation for negative trust, then one of them should propose burying the hatchet and removing the negative trust. Otherwise it never gets resolved, and everyone is worse-off for it.

A few years ago I had to communicate with people who had mental disorders (Schizophrenia). One of them was always walking with the Bible and waving a cross in front of everybody, he once told me he was in constant contact with God and the devil. But as long as there is no proof of that, it can't be true. I don't compare you to one of these people, you're smart enough, but you just don't have enough evidence. I have another account, but it has one message and no merit. And I am 100% sure of that. So linking me to esmanthra is not a good idea. Read my early translations, esmanthra there constantly scolded me for the quality of translations for which I am still ashamed.

Many, many years ago a colleague sent me to a call where the person complained that his neighbors were putting stink bombs down his walls at night. They would scurry up the downpipe and make a hell of a noise on the roof. When I suggested that it could be rats making the noise and the smell. He looked very angry and yelled "look ! I went to the pub and told my friends. They said "your neighbors really must have it in for you !" "They clearly believe me !" "Do your fucking job and catch them". He explained that he had confronted his neighbors about it but they had been "evasive".  At that stage he also became convinced I was part of the conspiracy. A report with concern for the welfare of the neighbors was filed.

[madnessteat]

Wow! 
What a great post! How many arguments!
So... After you defended the scamer, you can’t say anything smarter than “I don't know”? Even after I showed specific facts and you just have to think about them? 

I didn't say, "I don't know." I said I couldn't say "yes" for sure because of the lack of evidence. Without hard evidence this is just your guess. Such assumptions can be made as much as you like with respect to any forum user. Please also note that I am not defending Smart man. If you had incontrovertible evidence that Smart man is abusing something, I would support you.

[KTChampions]

1) I fail to see the direct correlation between tema and Total corruption in Russian local  involving DTs.

If you have a problem with Tema then open a thread in reputation about it.

1.) Perhaps you will see a correlation when you analyze a lot of individual cases (as i do). But you refuse to give a specific answer, even about one user tema.

2) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

2.) Please, give me a direct link to this answer.

3) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

3.) Please, give me a direct link to this answer.

4) Already answered in detail. Read my previous responses.

4.) Please, give me a direct link to this answer.

If you want to discuss individual transgressions then there is the reputation board for that.

Of course, I will do it, but here I want to show the general situation that is shaping up due to a combination of individual violations of many users.

What I have found over time is that there are a number of relatively new users that come to the forum and decide that they are self appointed judge, jury and executioner and like a zealot have a strict and uncompromising view of the world. Everyone else is wrong and they are right.

Oh 

~
At the moment I do not understand the arguments of taikuri13 and chimk, who have written about the situation with the Smart man
It is absolutely obvious from the evidence that the Smart man recruited people to provide bumping / shilling services for projects. And there seems to be no doubt that bumping services harm forum users, the reasons have been repeatedly mentioned in this topic.
~

MaoChao is not new user, zealot etc.

There are a number of DTs that in the past have taken uncompromising views on some of these issues. Several of them have been removed or publicly reprimanded for taking such uncompromising views.

This is your feedback.
I showed that Smart man is a account farmer and showed some of his alts.
It is ok?

Wow! 
What a great post! How many arguments!
So... After you defended the scamer, you can’t say anything smarter than “I don't know”? Even after I showed specific facts and you just have to think about them? 

I didn't say, "I don't know." I said I couldn't say "yes" for sure because of the lack of evidence. Without hard evidence this is just your guess. Such assumptions can be made as much as you like with respect to any forum user. Please also note that I am not defending Smart man. If you had incontrovertible evidence that Smart man is abusing something, I would support you.

I see it is very difficult for you to discuss a large amount of information. Especially for you I will lower the level of discussion.
1.) What can you say about bumping (taking into account proofs and  the opinion of Mao Chao)?
2.) What about alts of Smart man?

[xtraelv]

This is your feedback.
I showed that Smart man is a account farmer and showed some of his alts.
It is ok?

If you look at the alts listed that user impersonated another well known user on bitcointalk.
The comments on one of the alts listed there states:
"Account farmer using name similar to theyoungmillionaire in a probable attempt to try and extract merit. "


If you re-read my previous comments you will see my justification. All the extensive answers to your questions have been provided in this thread.

To borrow a famous quote from Satoshi:

If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry.

I have provided the information. I cannot help you understand it.