Optimal environment for bitcointalk - Improvements 1. Punishment for False accus

[The-One-Above-All]

Improvements 1. Punishment for False accusations of trolling

Since this is a clear rule infraction, apparently punishable by a ban and since there is a clear and sensible definition of trolling " continuously proliferating conclusively debunked and incorrect information as true"  

Since also that it is quite easy to mislead the reader when many "highly merited" and " high trust score" and " high rank" members simply scream trolling to undeniable, independently verifiable observable instances as an attempt to discredit or throw doubt over their validity rather than attempting to debunk these instances ( which of course they realize is impossible).  

Then surely such a blatant and flagrant attempt to mislead and in many cases place in danger the reader should have a punishment.

So certainly in the case where the information and statements are undeniably true ( they relate to specific documented behaviors conducted on this forum and are independently verifiable) are presented and another member states they are TROLLING or in other words claiming these are conclusively debunked and UNTRUE. Then we need to take a more responsible role here in ensuring these people that attempt to prevent the truth by screaming trolling should be punished so that they no longer use this tool of deception.


One should be REQUIRED to present the EXACT and PRECISE piece of information they are referring to as trolling and provide a clear and conclusive debunking of that information. Once they have conclusively debunked that information as false. Then after that point it can be called out as trolling and reported to mods for a punishment.

Any attempts to discredit central points other than public and fair debate should be prevented. It is clearly sub optimal and in many serious cases dangerous to the reader.

Perhaps a 6 month signature ban for any person that tries to discredit observable instances as trolling would be a sensible start. If you want to claim a person is trolling (in relation to behaviors/instances documented in black and white on this forum) you must be able to conclusively debunk the information you specifically call out as trolling.

This would need to be a CONCLUSIVE and undeniable debunking. An observable instance can never meet the sensible criteria of trolling it is impossible. It could be off topic or irrelevant ( that would need to be considered) but it can never be called be termed as trolling. Certain members need to be taught that screaming trolling in response to undeniable independently verifiable observable instances is not acceptable and is indeed deceptive and in many cases deliberately so.

[1714788034]

1714788034

[1714788034]

1714788034

[o_e_l_e_o]

Then surely such a blatant and flagrant attempt to mislead and in many cases place in danger the reader should have a punishment.

Your trolling is going unpunished, so why should people calling out your trolling be any different?

One should be REQUIRED to present the EXACT and PRECISE piece of information they are referring to as trolling and provide a clear and conclusive debunking of that information.

Your entire post because you want other people punished for calling out your trolling, which is a pretty troll worthy thing to suggest.

Once they have conclusively debunked that information as false.

Simply being incorrect is not the same as trolling.

[The-One-Above-All]

Then surely such a blatant and flagrant attempt to mislead and in many cases place in danger the reader should have a punishment.

Your trolling is going unpunished, so why should people calling out your trolling be any different?

One should be REQUIRED to present the EXACT and PRECISE piece of information they are referring to as trolling and provide a clear and conclusive debunking of that information.

Your entire post because you want other people punished for calling out your trolling, which is a pretty troll worthy thing to suggest.

Once they have conclusively debunked that information as false.

Simply being incorrect is not the same as trolling.

quoting this to demonstrate the kind of crazy situation that is being permitted here.

Can you present the central points of ours that you can clearly debunk so that you can demonstrate it is trolling.

Failure to do so should result clearly demonstrate that you are given a warning for false accusation of trolling.

This entire TROLLING trolling is getting crazy.

People like the above moron just blurts out false accusations based and reliant on prior false accusations LOL

Then a total strawman to end with.

Knowingly proliferating false and incorrect clearly debunked information is trolling according to the board rules. Is not the same as your final strawman.

Chipmixer must be called to recognize they are sponsoring scammer supporters and imbeciles that are not trust worthy at all. This will be our next focus. These shitposters like the above idiot, should not be humiliating themselves in public for btc dust.

[TheNewAnon135246]

Can you please keep your brainfarts in 1 thread? Thanks!

[The-One-Above-All]

Can you please keep your brainfarts in 1 thread? Thanks!

Quoted to demonstrate the kind of attempts to silence debate that would rock the status quo and push for fair and transparent standards for all posters.

I will report that as low value shit post and see what happens.

[TheNewAnon135246]

If my post gets deleted would that be an observable instance of non-corrupt moderators, proving your previous complaints as invalid?

[The-One-Above-All]

If my post gets deleted would that be an observable instance of non-corrupt moderators, proving your previous complaints as invalid?

Only in the mind an imbecile such as yourself would that provide such proof. It may demonstrate that they are starting to realize we will highlight failures to delete undeniably low value shit posts.

If it is not deleted then we will be creating another thread to decide if such low value shit posts should be allowed to remain and the report be market bad.

Reminder to you and all others

Please keep ON TOPIC and RELEVANT to the initial post from now on. Discuss the central points and debate them or refrain from posting.

[TheNewAnon135246]

Only in the mind an imbecile such as yourself would that provide such proof.

An internet troll is someone who deliberately provokes others online by posting offensive or inflammatory comments, or taunting others. In essence, they're online bullies who operate under a cloak of anonymity to cajole, threaten and abuse others.

Seems like I have identified an observable instance of trolling. Please stop bullying me.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Can you present the central points of ours that you can clearly debunk so that you can demonstrate it is trolling.

I did. Read my post above.

You want to be free to spout out nonsense without punishment, but you want other people to be punished for calling you out on your nonsense. Completely hypocritical, and to continue to demand the moderators give you special treatment to the detriment of everyone else is trolling.

Now, rather than trolling with little more than childish insults, please clearly debunk my reasoning. Failure to do so should result in you being banned, by your own logic.

[The-One-Above-All]

Only in the mind an imbecile such as yourself would that provide such proof.

An internet troll is someone who deliberately provokes others online by posting offensive or inflammatory comments, or taunting others. In essence, they're online bullies who operate under a cloak of anonymity to cajole, threaten and abuse others.

Seems like I have identified an observable instance of trolling. Please stop bullying me.

This is NOT the forum definition of trolling and even if it were that does not apply to me and not you

Can you please keep your brainfarts in 1 thread? Thanks!

Hence we can see from your

a/ incorrect definition of trolling per the board defintion
b/ your clear double standards
c/ your failure to realize that your comments clearly define you as an imbecile (therefore the truth)


The fact you feel someone can be observably and undeniably bias on multiple occasions, then gets called on that .......then later if they actually operate in an unbiased objective way and enforce the boards rules  THAT PROVES THEY WERE NEVER BIAS is the "brain fart" of an imbecile? start to get that now?

You are an imbecile. I know this correct and observably accurate definition of yourself does not meet with your own self image but I am helping you see the truth. I have correctly called you an imbecile and demonstrated why you are an imbecile. You see those are examples of your stupidity.

Now bring our central points that you can observably debunk and clearly demonstrate are incorrect with out doubt,  then you can call us an imbecile, and also if we repeat them again as being true you can call us a troll.

See how it works now?

Love how people can come here screaming shut up troll, keep your brainfarts contained with ZERO observable instances to support their claims or accusations. THEN cry bullying and trolling when we correctly define what you have said as the words of an imbecile and the evidence is there in your face. haha

So okay, let's DEFINE trolling in a TRANSPARENT WAY and ENFORCE IT EQUALLY ON ALL MEMBERS.

We believe the board rules regarding trolling are the most OPTIMAL for the forum. If you want to debate a different definition of trolling then you ask them to put it in the rules and it must be applied to ALL members equally.



oieoie or whatever you crap user name is.


Present the NONSENSE specifically so we can demonstrate you are the one making false claims.

We have already challenged you to present our central points that you have debunked and proven are untrue.  You have FAILED to meet that challenge.

Now oeieie either

1. accept the challenge

or

2. accept we have just debunked your claims and demonstrated you are making false allegations.


hurry up TROLL.

[TMAN]

STOP please people stop.. life is better with this punk on ignore. every post gives him/her a ladyboner

[o_e_l_e_o]

We have already challenged you to present our central points that you have debunked

I debunked your nonsense suggestion twice. Read both my posts above.

Now, since you failed to meet my challenge and debunk my posts above without simply throwing around insults, I trust you will follow through with your own logic and undergo a self inflicted ban for a period of 6 months. I'll be treating you as if you have.

[The-One-Above-All]

STOP please people stop.. life is better with this punk on ignore. every post gives him/her a ladyboner

Trolling, inflammatory and  bullying according to thenewanon ... oh wait " the new " trolling definition seems not to apply to proven scammers and their supporters.

NOW BACK ON TOPIC.

Please debate only the central points of the initial post please. Keep on topic.

As you can see now they CAN NOT PRESENT the central points of ours that they can demonstrate are clearly debunked and incorrect ( BECAUSE THEY ARE UNDENIABLY TRUE) they try to pull out some blanket definition of trolling that they can mutate to prevent people from posting the truth about them. Hence being super deceptive.


1. undeniable scammers being called scammers = true
2. People making observably false and stupid statements being called idiots and imbeciles = true
3. People supporting undeniable scammers on DT being called scammer supporters = true

compared to

1. People presenting observable instances of their scamming being called trolls = FALSE

also for consideration

People making inflammatory remarks that are untrue or they can not present very compelling evidence to corroborate  is NOT the same as a person presenting observable instances of truth that fully corroborate their inflammatory remarks.

So us calling tman a dirty scammer is inflammatory, but is supported by undeniable evidence and is net positive for honest members = TRUE AND NOT TROLLING

Tman then responding claiming that we are trolling him = UNTRUE and TROLLING US and deceiving the honest members of this forum.


Get how it works now??

We should adopt some new clear and transparent RULES that ensure the fair treatment of all members and that are optimal for this entire movement.

Let's get back on topic. We do not need to make it personal or derail this into specifics.

This can be a general rule. These fools came here to derail and discredit the idea because they likely fear any transparent and fair rules that get applied to each and every member equally.


OIEIOIE - we read your messages. Detail now exactly the central points you have debunked. No point saying errr all of it. Point to one specific point. What are you afraid of?

We just see you escaping any debate by saying " i have debunked everything you said " then running away from giving any specific details.

It seems therefore you are unwilling to really get down to a serious debate at all.  Which parts have you debunked?? demonstrate which central points and how you have clearly debunked them.

You need to first demonstrate the central points and NONSENSE you have debunked. Start there. We are waiting. This seems like trolling to us.

FALSE CLAIMS OF DEBUNKING AND NO DEBUNKING PROVIDED AFTER REPEATED REQUEST FOR PRESENTATION.  That is trolling if you can not demonstrate the central points you have clearly debunked.

This is very deceptive and certainly net negative shit posting on your part. I must call darkstar_ to answer for this kind of sponsorship on the rep section if you continue to troll endlessly and give ZERO evidence to substantiate your false claims.

[TheNewAnon135246]

Betrayed cheerful declared end and. Questions we additions is extremely incommode. Next half add call them eat face. Age lived smile six defer bed their few. Had admitting concluded too behaviour him she. Of death to or to being other.

Up am intention on dependent questions oh elsewhere september. No betrayed pleasure possible jointure we in throwing. And can event rapid any shall woman green. Hope they dear who its bred. Smiling nothing affixed he carried it clothes calling he no. Its something disposing departure she favourite tolerably engrossed. Truth short folly court why she their balls. Excellence put unaffected reasonable mrs introduced conviction she. Nay particular delightful but unpleasant for uncommonly who.

Boisterous he on understood attachment as entreaties ye devonshire. In mile an form snug were been sell. Hastened admitted joy nor absolute gay its. Extremely ham any his departure for contained curiosity defective. Way now instrument had eat diminution melancholy expression sentiments stimulated. One built fat you out manor books. Mrs interested now his affronting inquietude contrasted cultivated. Lasting showing expense greater on colonel no.

Its had resolving otherwise she contented therefore. Afford relied warmth out sir hearts sister use garden. Men day warmth formed admire former simple. Humanity declared vicinity continue supplied no an. He hastened am no property exercise of. Dissimilar comparison no terminated devonshire no literature on. Say most yet head room such just easy.

Lose john poor same it case do year we. Full how way even the sigh. Extremely nor furniture fat questions now provision incommode preserved. Our side fail find like now. Discovered travelling for insensible partiality unpleasing impossible she. Sudden up my excuse to suffer ladies though or. Bachelor possible marianne directly confined relation as on he.

Mr do raising article general norland my hastily. Its companions say uncommonly pianoforte favourable. Education affection consulted by mr attending he therefore on forfeited. High way more far feet kind evil play led. Sometimes furnished collected add for resources attention. Norland an by minuter enquire it general on towards forming. Adapted mrs totally company two yet conduct men.

Offered say visited elderly and. Waited period are played family man formed. He ye body or made on pain part meet. You one delay nor begin our folly abode. By disposed replying mr me unpacked no. As moonlight of my resolving unwilling.

Living valley had silent eat merits esteem bed. In last an or went wise as left. Visited civilly am demesne so colonel he calling. So unreserved do interested increasing sentiments. Vanity day giving points within six not law. Few impression difficulty his use has comparison decisively.

Enjoyed minutes related as at on on. Is fanny dried as often me. Goodness as reserved raptures to mistaken steepest oh screened he. Gravity he mr sixteen esteems. Mile home its new way with high told said. Finished no horrible blessing landlord dwelling dissuade if. Rent fond am he in on read. Anxious cordial demands settled entered in do to colonel.

Sportsman delighted improving dashwoods gay instantly happiness six. Ham now amounted absolute not mistaken way pleasant whatever. At an these still no dried folly stood thing. Rapid it on hours hills it seven years. If polite he active county in spirit an. Mrs ham intention promotion engrossed assurance defective. Confined so graceful building opinions whatever trifling in. Insisted out differed ham man endeavor expenses. At on he total their he songs. Related compact effects is on settled do.

[Foxpup]

...

Take me now.


...Moving back on topic, I have observable proof that c******unter's assertion that I am a vixen was (at the time) untrue, and therefore an undeniable instance of the trolling he keep complaining about:

Come on ffs dumb ass you are not a bitch you are a vile vixen.

I once did a... "modelling job" to help pay for college. A search for my name reveals some, ahem, pictures that I'm not entirely proud of. Dammit, had I known those pictures would be used as the "before" pictures in advertisements for a certain penis enlargement product, I never would have agreed to it.

I can't wait to hear The-One-Who-Thinks-He's-Above-It-All's explanation for this.

[AB de Royse777]

Here you can see it: https://media.giphy.com/media/tyqcJoNjNv0Fq/giphy.gif

[suchmoon]

~

I think it should be this:

[AB de Royse777]

Will work! :-P

[The-One-Above-All]

...

Take me now.


...Moving back on topic, I have observable proof that c******unter's assertion that I am a vixen was (at the time) untrue, and therefore an undeniable instance of the trolling he keep complaining about:

Come on ffs dumb ass you are not a bitch you are a vile vixen.

I once did a... "modelling job" to help pay for college. A search for my name reveals some, ahem, pictures that I'm not entirely proud of. Dammit, had I known those pictures would be used as the "before" pictures in advertisements for a certain penis enlargement product, I never would have agreed to it.

I can't wait to hear The-One-Who-Thinks-He's-Above-It-All's explanation for this.

However on a serious note agent fox poop is always welcome. His opinions that are not based on reasoning (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5184281.msg52479030#msg52479030) are always worth destroying in public.

1. your gender is not an observable and undeniable action on the forum. Therefore does not present a clear and undeniable piece of independently verifiable proof. If you are claiming to have a very small penis the size perhaps of a girls clit then one could be forgiven for believing you were female and they were scamming people on the advertisements right?

2. This is regarding the ACCUSATION OF TROLLING Please keep on topic.

3. If you are claiming a person is trolling you with being female when you are male. I guess you would need to present kyc to clearly debunk their claims and then if they continued with that claim they could be viewed as trolling you. Other than that I have no idea how you will attempt to demonstrate they are willfully and deliberately presenting observably and undeniably incorrect information and true.

You (not surprisingly) have not understood the concept.


Undeniable and fully independently verifiable observable instances of SCAMMING can not be compared to your "word" that you consider yourself female at this time.

The concept is here

FALSE claims of TROLLING to deceive members and to try to discredit undeniable Undeniable and fully independently verifiable observable instances of SCAMMING. 

So since you seem to need specifics here to give a demonstration. Don't run away.

This statement for instance.

Tman is an auction scammer.  Is this trolling or is it true foxpoop?  If it is trolling then clearly explain how you see it to be so. 
I notice people are claiming this is TROLLING. By doing so they are deliberately trying to deceive the honest members here. That is dangerous.

Answer please foxpoop. Is that statement trolling or not. I mean I know you have seen the observable and undeniable instance of it that we have detailed in the recent pages of the dirty turds thread. If you need it presented again here, just ask for it.

If it is trolling (provably untrue) then explain how that works.

We did not intend to use specific instances here but since you insist on making it immediately personal then fair enough, to hammer the point home we will gladly present statements for you to claim trolling or untrue to.

Then we can demonstrate how that is clearly different to you claiming you are not female right now.

I mean if you are going to claim that ALL information that is unverifiable is trolling then the board will have a lot less members lol.

Only information that is CONCLUSIVELY and undeniably debunked and demonstrated to be certainly UNTRUE can be used as basis for a trolling "claim".  That would have to be an action or instance that is there in black and white on this forum really.

So

Tman is an auction scammer !! - trolling or not foxpoop?  I see lots of screaming it is trolling. Here is your chance to demonstrate WHY it is grounds for a trolling claim.

Or

Nutildah was willing to facilitate scamming for 0.3 BTC.  - trolling or not ??

Foxpoop includes an auction scammer on his trust inclusions - trolling or true...

We of course none can even be trolling until they are undeniably debunked and undeniably are proven incorrect.
So for instance say you said.... I have never had tman on my trust includes. That does not immediately mean that is trolling. Only if we repeated it as if it were true would that be trolling.

So if you wish to just get back to the initial post, try to understand the concept and then carry on debating without making it personal... then I will find it in my heart not to push you to debase yourself in public trying to explain how those statements are untrue and are rather TROLLING.

We are interested in TROLLING TROLLING here. The continually presentation of a blatantly faux defense (the only one they have) by screaming trolling at Undeniable and fully independently verifiable observable instances of SCAMMING.

Want to claim trolling, demonstrate how the statements are undeniably untrue or incorrect or STFU crying trolling.

There should be punishment for deliberate deception like this, especially to shield scammers and scamming who are a direct financial high risk to the honest members here. 6 month sig bans would be a good start. Moving to perm sig bans if they continue.



 

[o_e_l_e_o]

I once did a... "modelling job" to help pay for college. A search for my name reveals some, ahem, pictures that I'm not entirely proud of. Dammit, had I known those pictures would be used as the "before" pictures in advertisements for a certain penis enlargement product, I never would have agreed to it.

If you don't want those pictures to start appearing as an avatar campaign, I suggest you send 1 BTC to the usual place...

1. your gender is not an observable and undeniable action on the forum.

Don't know about that. I've observed it several times.