TECSHARE is abusing the trust system

[Vod]

I figured I would start the topic.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=15728;page=trusted&dt

You should not be able to trade your way onto DT like this profile has done.
https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx

To be clear - I'm stating that TECSHARE's trust ratings should not be considered honest and there is an agenda behind his trust list manipulation.   He is scamming the trust system.   :/

[1715016400]

1715016400

[1715016400]

1715016400

[1715016400]

1715016400

[1715016400]

1715016400

[hacker1001101001]

To be clear - I'm stating that TECSHARE's trust ratings should not be considered honest and there is an agenda behind his trust list manipulation.   He is scamming the trust system.   :/

I think one can use ~TECSHARE to solve this issue and to avoid his ratings.

He is in DT due to the community inclusions he has received, it cannot be stated as scamming the trust system nor manipulation.

[TECSHARE]

I figured I would start the topic.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=15728;page=trusted&dt

You should not be able to trade your way onto DT like this profile has done.
https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx

To be clear - I'm stating that TECSHARE's trust ratings should not be considered honest and there is an agenda behind his trust list manipulation.   He is scamming the trust system.   :/

You caught me red handed using the trust system exactly as it was intended building a reputation trading over almost a decade. We can't all shake down the user base indiscriminately tagging people assembly line style in order to give the appearance of serving the community like you Vod.

I am sure this post has nothing to do with your years long bunny boiling level of obsession with me does it now Mr. Sad Party Magician? Get some new tricks, the sponge balls and hiding a quarter behind the ear is getting old.

To be clear - I'm stating that TECSHARE's trust ratings should not be considered honest and there is an agenda behind his trust list manipulation.   He is scamming the trust system.   :/

I think one can use ~TECSHARE to solve this issue and to avoid his ratings.

He is in DT due to the community inclusions he has received, it cannot be stated as scamming the trust system nor manipulation.

Or you could solve this issue by using ~Vod, I would think that would be a more effective solution, especially since he is abusing the trust system again to play his little petty games of retribution.

Vod   2019-09-09 Reference "This profile has fundamentally abused the trust system, trading positive trust with as many others as possible to get on Default Trust. See reference and the BPIP DT Change Log for examples. Do not trust this profile's trust of others by adding ~TECSHARE to your personal trust list. "

[Vod]

You caught me red handed using the trust system exactly as it was intended building a reputation trading over almost a decade.

Wasn't talking about that - I'm referencing your recent trust trading with other members.

Go to https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx and type TECSHARE in the Quick Filter box and see for yourself...

[TECSHARE]

You caught me red handed using the trust system exactly as it was intended building a reputation trading over almost a decade.

Wasn't talking about that - I'm referencing your recent trust trading with other members.

Go to https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx and type TECSHARE in the Quick Filter box and see for yourself...

Is a log of DT changes supposed to prove something? So now immediately any action I take regarding my trust list is suspect and therefore I am a scammer just because you say so? This is just more of the usual transparent and pathetic sad party clown act you have been doing for years. The trust system is nothing but a cudgel for you to take retribution on anyone who dares question you, that is of course when you aren't trying to get the IRS to do it for you.

So how long before you "learn your lesson"  and "take a break" and  "ignore me" for the 8th time again, or whatever it is, as people continually make excuses for and enable your consistently abusive and erratic behavior over the years?

[nutildah]

I won't go so far as to say this makes him a "scammer," but its pretty dishonest behavior. Its obvious what TS has been doing over the past few months, and its evidenced best by him adding 6 Turkish local board DT1s to his trust list weeks or days after they were added to DT1.

There should really be an open discussion as to whether or not this type of behavior is an acceptable practice for a DT1 member, and as shown by the fact that TECSHARE is now back at -1, its safe to say that the community agrees that its not.

Let's take a look at his include/exclude history according to BPIP:


7/23/2019 9:34:59 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts by rallier (2)
7/28/2019 3:18:28 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts by rallier

7/23/2019 9:45:04 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts PHI1618 (1)

8/2/2019 5:33:52 PM   Matthias9515* (2) trusts TECSHARE
8/2/2019 8:25:25 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Matthias9515 (2)

8/4/2019 10:00:19 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts bobita (2)
8/5/2019 10:07:57 AM   bobita (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/4/2019 4:43:55 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:32:09 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:24:47 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/7/2019 2:29:57 AM   Kalemder (1) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/7/2019 3:50:44 AM   TECSHARE (0) trusts mhanbostanci (2)
9/7/2019 10:13:59 AM   mhanbostanci (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

*became DT1 at this time

As you can see, Matthias9515 was the only member to trust TECSHARE first, and TS didn't get a reciprocal trust from by rallier or PHI1618. He also added Vispilio to his list, who recently fell off DT1 for not having the minimum requirements. He also did the same thing with WhiteManWhite:

(sometime between 3/31 and 4/6) TECSHARE trusts WhiteManWhite
5/30/2019 2:39:17 PM   WhiteManWhite (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

Would you trust somebody who goes around adding new DT1s to his trust list despite having no previous interaction with them whatsoever, and who doesn't speak their native tongue? I wouldn't.

I can forgive the new DTs for not really having a respect for or knowledge of how the trust system works, but as TECSHARE is one of the more veteran members of the forum, he should really know better than this by now.

You are supposed to be adding members to your trust list who you _trust_, and who you think do a good job of leaving feedback, not out of hopes that they will reciprocate by adding you to their lists.

Allowing this kind of thing to happen without calling it out sets a dangerous precedent going forward.

[DireWolfM14]

TecSHARE has definitely been manipulating his trust-list for selfish purposes, but I reject the idea that he's a scammer.  I believe anyone who deals with TecSHARE need not worry about getting scammed.  He has proven himself to be an honest trader.

But again, his policy of trust-list reciprocity is an obvious attempt to manipulate the system. 

[marlboroza]

I agree with nutildah and DireWolfM14 and I want to add that negative is not appropriate. He is not scammer, he is trusted trader but his moral is questionable.

[Timelord2067]

I won't go so far as to say this makes him a "scammer," but its pretty dishonest behavior. Its obvious what TS has been doing over the past few months, and its evidenced best by him adding 6 Turkish local board DT1s to his trust list weeks or days after they were added to DT1.

There should really be an open discussion as to whether or not this type of behavior is an acceptable practice for a DT1 member, and as shown by the fact that TECSHARE is now back at -1, its safe to say that the community agrees that its not.

Let's take a look at his include/exclude history according to BPIP:


7/23/2019 9:34:59 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts by rallier (2)
7/28/2019 3:18:28 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts by rallier

7/23/2019 9:45:04 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts PHI1618 (1)

8/2/2019 5:33:52 PM   Matthias9515* (2) trusts TECSHARE
8/2/2019 8:25:25 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Matthias9515 (2)

8/4/2019 10:00:19 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts bobita (2)
8/5/2019 10:07:57 AM   bobita (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/4/2019 4:43:55 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:32:09 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:24:47 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/7/2019 2:29:57 AM   Kalemder (1) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/7/2019 3:50:44 AM   TECSHARE (0) trusts mhanbostanci (2)
9/7/2019 10:13:59 AM   mhanbostanci (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

*became DT1 at this time

As you can see, Matthias9515 was the only member to trust TECSHARE first, and TS didn't get a reciprocal trust from by rallier or PHI1618. He also added Vispilio to his list, who recently fell off DT1 for not having the minimum requirements. He also did the same thing with WhiteManWhite:

(sometime between 3/31 and 4/6) TECSHARE trusts WhiteManWhite
5/30/2019 2:39:17 PM   WhiteManWhite (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

Would you trust somebody who goes around adding new DT1s to his trust list despite having no previous interaction with them whatsoever, and who doesn't speak their native tongue? I wouldn't.

I can forgive the new DTs for not really having a respect for or knowledge of how the trust system works, but as TECSHARE is one of the more veteran members of the forum, he should really know better than this by now.

You are supposed to be adding members to your trust list who you _trust_, and who you think do a good job of leaving feedback, not out of hopes that they will reciprocate by adding you to their lists.

Allowing this kind of thing to happen without calling it out sets a dangerous precedent going forward.

These are just some of the people who conspired to create a fake flag against me here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181723.0
after I exposed their collaboration in this flag thread here: [Flag] DT ring creation discussion / merit abuse / collusion to harm BCT https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181603.0

Most of the people in the thread overlooked the fact that their ringleader obtained merits by deception. Then, instead of handing them out to who was promised, handed them out in a criss-cross pattern to bump a select few into DT1/2. From what I can see mhanbostanci is the only one to make it to DT1 and has given me negative trust wall feedback.


TECSHARE has made a very thinly veiled threat to stalk me unless I remove my *neutral* trust/feedback post (last paragraph and his "PS") in this now archived post:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190908033629/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181723.msg52379325

It would seem that Tecshare is making good on his thread by throwing his hat into the ring with these collaborators.

[LoyceV]

There should really be an open discussion as to whether or not this type of behavior is an acceptable practice for a DT1 member,

Agreed!

Allowing this kind of thing to happen without calling it out sets a dangerous precedent going forward.

I'd like to add to the open discussion the question whether or not there should be a technical limit to the number of DT1-votes any DT1-member gets. For example: Is it really desirable that a DT1-member without any support from other DT1-members gets to include or exclude many other DT1-members? Or should there be a limit on the "voting power" within DT1 (possibly depending on the number of DT1-inclusions the user has)?

I agree with nutildah and DireWolfM14 and I want to add that negative is not appropriate. He is not scammer, he is trusted trader but his moral is questionable.

Agreed. I think this quote from theymos applies here too:

All three of TMAN, Vod, and OgNasty are forum veterans with good trade histories, and I would tend to trust all three of them (to varying degrees).

(the rest of theymos' post is worth reading too)

[DireWolfM14]

I'd like to add to the open discussion the question whether or not there should be a technical limit to the number of DT1-votes any DT1-member gets. For example: Is it really desirable that a DT1-member without any support from other DT1-members gets to include or exclude many other DT1-members? Or should there be a limit on the "voting power" within DT1 (possibly depending on the number of DT1-inclusions the user has)?

I know you've suggested before that DT2 inclusion should require at least two DT1 votes, and I tend to agree with this strategy.  It would mitigate the TrustSelfScratching abuse that goes on and prevent many shady users from getting voted to DT2.  I would suggest to add the same restriction for DT1 inclusion as well.  Along with the merit-based votes, two DT1 inclusions would also be required to qualify for DT1.  The system would still be decentralized, but a little more restrictive.

[Blacknavy]

Tecshare objektifliği nedeniyle çok uzun süredir benim trust listemde olan, güvenilir ama diğerleri tarafından sistemin dışına itilmiş bir 2011 DT üyesidir. Bu şekilde objektif ve sağlıklı kararlar alabilen üyeleri desteklememiz gerektiğini düşünüyorum ki kendisi de yerel forumda güvendiği üyeleri destekliyor. Sistemi suistimal edenleri engellemenin bir yolu ise, sistemi suistimal etmeyenleri desteklemektir.

Theymos, Tecshare, OgNasty, LoyceV, DarkStar_ güvenilir ve objektif üyelerdir. DarkStar_ DT sistemini bize anlatan ve destekleyen ilk kişidir fakat kendi aramızda kapıştığımız için haklı olarak desteği çekti o ayrı konudur, bunun yanında LoyceV de kısmen objektif davranışlar sergiledi.

Yerelde; EFS, by rallier, bobita ve mhanbostanci güvenilirdir, başka güvenilir üyeler de vardır fakat ya EFS gibi Trust sistemine dahil olmak istemiyorlar ya da kendilerini buraya yazabilecek kadar tanımıyorum.

Globaldeki en güvenilmez üyeler ise; Foxpup ve Lauda’dır.

DT üyelerinin anlık değişimleri buradan takip edilebilir: https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx

I recommended people in the Turkish local forum to add trusted members to their trust lists.

In my opinion,

Trusted members in global section are Theymos, Tecshare, OgNasty, LoyceV, DarkStar_ (and maybe more, but i don't know others for now)
Trusted members in Turkish section are EFS, by rallier, bobita and mhanbostanci (and maybe more)

We are trying to learn trust system and i tried to help people who want to learn this system. Therefore, some Turkish people added Tecshare and others in their trust list. Tecshare is objective, helpful and reliable like Theymos, OgNasty, LoyceV, DarkStar_. I'm trying to find trusted people in DT members. If we don't search, how Turkish people can learn Trust system? I will not send a post again.

[Timelord2067]

My understanding is that the more merits you have the stronger your DT votes are in groups of 250 merits.

[actmyname]

My understanding is that the more merits you have the stronger your DT votes are in groups of 250 merits.

They're all equal and follow a "who needs it most" sieve from what I recall. You are merely entitled to more 250-bin votes for DT elections.

[TECSHARE]

I won't go so far as to say this makes him a "scammer," but its pretty dishonest behavior. Its obvious what TS has been doing over the past few months, and its evidenced best by him adding 6 Turkish local board DT1s to his trust list weeks or days after they were added to DT1.

There should really be an open discussion as to whether or not this type of behavior is an acceptable practice for a DT1 member, and as shown by the fact that TECSHARE is now back at -1, its safe to say that the community agrees that its not.

Let's take a look at his include/exclude history according to BPIP:


7/23/2019 9:34:59 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts by rallier (2)
7/28/2019 3:18:28 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts by rallier

7/23/2019 9:45:04 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts PHI1618 (1)

8/2/2019 5:33:52 PM   Matthias9515* (2) trusts TECSHARE
8/2/2019 8:25:25 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Matthias9515 (2)

8/4/2019 10:00:19 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts bobita (2)
8/5/2019 10:07:57 AM   bobita (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/4/2019 4:43:55 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:32:09 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:24:47 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/7/2019 2:29:57 AM   Kalemder (1) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/7/2019 3:50:44 AM   TECSHARE (0) trusts mhanbostanci (2)
9/7/2019 10:13:59 AM   mhanbostanci (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

*became DT1 at this time

As you can see, Matthias9515 was the only member to trust TECSHARE first, and TS didn't get a reciprocal trust from by rallier or PHI1618. He also added Vispilio to his list, who recently fell off DT1 for not having the minimum requirements. He also did the same thing with WhiteManWhite:

(sometime between 3/31 and 4/6) TECSHARE trusts WhiteManWhite
5/30/2019 2:39:17 PM   WhiteManWhite (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

Would you trust somebody who goes around adding new DT1s to his trust list despite having no previous interaction with them whatsoever, and who doesn't speak their native tongue? I wouldn't.

I can forgive the new DTs for not really having a respect for or knowledge of how the trust system works, but as TECSHARE is one of the more veteran members of the forum, he should really know better than this by now.

You are supposed to be adding members to your trust list who you _trust_, and who you think do a good job of leaving feedback, not out of hopes that they will reciprocate by adding you to their lists.

Allowing this kind of thing to happen without calling it out sets a dangerous precedent going forward.

I love this critical analysis of everyone I add to my trust list as if I obviously should be suspect, but any time I bring up say the inclusion of Nutilduhhh even though the account was publicly offered for sale, no one bothers replying. Of course I am required to defend my inclusions but no one else in the clown car mob is. More rules for thee but not for me, that's Bitcointalk SOP.

You want to REALLY know why I added those Turkish users? Because they were just barely off the DT and I wanted to see it more diverse. Additionally because anyone the resident clowns exclude I immediately find interest in. The Turkish community was obviously being targeted. I don't believe it was for racist reasons though, I just think the clowns feel like they can't keep their iron grip of nepotism if more groups are included. All this circus is, is punishment for working to bust up their little clown cartel, and it is painfully transparent.

I won't go so far as to say this makes him a "scammer," but its pretty dishonest behavior. Its obvious what TS has been doing over the past few months, and its evidenced best by him adding 6 Turkish local board DT1s to his trust list weeks or days after they were added to DT1.

There should really be an open discussion as to whether or not this type of behavior is an acceptable practice for a DT1 member, and as shown by the fact that TECSHARE is now back at -1, its safe to say that the community agrees that its not.

Let's take a look at his include/exclude history according to BPIP:


7/23/2019 9:34:59 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts by rallier (2)
7/28/2019 3:18:28 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts by rallier

7/23/2019 9:45:04 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts PHI1618 (1)

8/2/2019 5:33:52 PM   Matthias9515* (2) trusts TECSHARE
8/2/2019 8:25:25 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Matthias9515 (2)

8/4/2019 10:00:19 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts bobita (2)
8/5/2019 10:07:57 AM   bobita (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/4/2019 4:43:55 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:32:09 AM   TECSHARE (0) no longer trusts Kalemder (1)
9/6/2019 5:24:47 PM   TECSHARE (0) trusts Kalemder (1)
9/7/2019 2:29:57 AM   Kalemder (1) trusts TECSHARE (0)

9/7/2019 3:50:44 AM   TECSHARE (0) trusts mhanbostanci (2)
9/7/2019 10:13:59 AM   mhanbostanci (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

*became DT1 at this time

As you can see, Matthias9515 was the only member to trust TECSHARE first, and TS didn't get a reciprocal trust from by rallier or PHI1618. He also added Vispilio to his list, who recently fell off DT1 for not having the minimum requirements. He also did the same thing with WhiteManWhite:

(sometime between 3/31 and 4/6) TECSHARE trusts WhiteManWhite
5/30/2019 2:39:17 PM   WhiteManWhite (2) trusts TECSHARE (0)

Would you trust somebody who goes around adding new DT1s to his trust list despite having no previous interaction with them whatsoever, and who doesn't speak their native tongue? I wouldn't.

I can forgive the new DTs for not really having a respect for or knowledge of how the trust system works, but as TECSHARE is one of the more veteran members of the forum, he should really know better than this by now.

You are supposed to be adding members to your trust list who you _trust_, and who you think do a good job of leaving feedback, not out of hopes that they will reciprocate by adding you to their lists.

Allowing this kind of thing to happen without calling it out sets a dangerous precedent going forward.

These are just some of the people who conspired to create a fake flag against me here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181723.0
after I exposed their collaboration in this flag thread here: [Flag] DT ring creation discussion / merit abuse / collusion to harm BCT https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181603.0

Most of the people in the thread overlooked the fact that their ringleader obtained merits by deception. Then, instead of handing them out to who was promised, handed them out in a criss-cross pattern to bump a select few into DT1/2. From what I can see mhanbostanci is the only one to make it to DT1 and has given me negative trust wall feedback.


TECSHARE has made a very thinly veiled threat to stalk me unless I remove my *neutral* trust/feedback post (last paragraph and his "PS") in this now archived post:

https://web.archive.org/web/20190908033629/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181723.msg52379325

It would seem that Tecshare is making good on his thread by throwing his hat into the ring with these collaborators.

You forgot to add that the very first thing I asked these people to do was remove their support for their invalid flag against you. Of course that doesn't count, because I was critical of your own invalid flags, and of course you can't tolerate anyone criticizing you can you? Of course not. I added them because after having a discussion with them and explaining why it is not in their interest to abuse the system against you, they responded in a way that engendered my trust. You on the other hand responded in a way that engendered my distrust, and that is of course why you are here throwing stones from your glass house.

[Vispilio]

Case 1:
Spreading false rumors about ALL the DT members of an entire local section on a daily basis, and when they finally respond with excellent arguments, adding them ALL to your distrust list.

BTT DT mafia's response:
"Hey back off buddy, we are just exercising our freedom of speech, and my trust list is mine to do with as I please."


Case 2:
Engaging in intellectual debate with said Turkish users, and after numerous fruitful conversations, adding some of them to your positive Trust list.

BTT DT mafia's verdict:
"Worst abuse of the trust system, what a manipulative opportunist, burn him at the stake, exclude him immediately, the fortress of corruption must not fall ..."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sure most sane and reasonable members will not comment for fear of retaliation by the DT mafia, but something looks pretty fucked up to me in this picture ladies & gents,

I would be very interested to hear how some truly independent and courageous guys like theymos and OgNasty would assess this totally twisted situation.

Warm Regards

[suchmoon]

~

The problem is the reciprocal part of those relationships. Adding or removing someone with or without conversation is everyone's personal business. But when a quid pro quo (or retaliatory) pattern develops you can expect raised eyebrows.

Your exaggerations are not helping either, someone might see you as a conspiracy nutjob and consider it a flaw in your judgement.

[TECSHARE]

~

The problem is the reciprocal part of those relationships. Adding or removing someone with or without conversation is everyone's personal business. But when a quid pro quo (or retaliatory) pattern develops you can expect raised eyebrows.

Your exaggerations are not helping either, someone might see you as a conspiracy nutjob and consider it a flaw in your judgement.

[proposes a conspiracy, then criticizes opponent for making up conspiracy theories]

There was never any quid pro quo, or any pattern of it, this is just your projections upon the situation because it serves your goals of punishing me for working to unseat your clown cartel. This is 100% a matter of self preservation of your own authority, which not shored up with an iron nepotist hand, will collapse like a pile of sand when exposed to an actually decentralized DT where people are offered legitimate choices instead of just "with us" or "against us".

You want to talk about retaliatory patterns now? Why are the retaliatory patterns of exclusions enacted upon me that continually JUUST so happen to occur after I call one of you clowns out? Why is it none of you righteously object then? Your collective retaliation is sanctified though is it? How about your best bud Yahoo62278 for example, deleted multiple positive trust ratings for me after I was critical of him in this thread, which coincidentally is about another almost decade long pattern of retaliation. He shouldn't be abusing the trust system for retaliation, but of course not a peep from the circus. I guess they were on vacation that day. This is as it has been for a long time here, two sets of standards. One for you, and one for everyone else.

[Vispilio]

~

... exaggerations are not helping either, someone might see you as a conspiracy nutjob ...

[proposes a conspiracy, then criticizes opponent for making up conspiracy theories]

There was never any quid pro quo, or any pattern of it, this is just your projections upon the situation because it serves your goals of punishing me for working to unseat your clown cartel. This is 100% a matter of self preservation of your own authority, which not shored up with an iron nepotist hand, will collapse like a pile of sand when exposed to an actually decentralized DT where people are offered legitimate choices instead of just "with us" or "against us".

exactly, also there is no conspiracy, everything I've described above has already happened , another totally flat argument
by the primary merit source of the DT mafia...

[teeGUMES]

In the last two weeks we have seen the words racist and scammer used in very very poor fashion on the forum. These words have no meaning nowadays because of you people. Open a dictionary or google the proper terms you are looking for.
These are now used for clickbait to gather the uneducated pitchfork mobs. The world has gone to shit in this regard, don't let our forum follow.