More trust system abuse by Lauda

[TECSHARE]

Yep, can't have anyone asking valid questions. That needs to be censored, for the good of the forum of course, and most certainly not to serve personal interests. Feel free to finally answer here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg53938213#msg53938213

I expect you not to though because you prefer deflection rather than answering a simple question. After all, if you answered the question clearly and directly, people might see the conflict in your logic in supporting trust system abusers now might they?

Fix the link, it points to a wall of quotes that seems to be mistakenly posted in a Vod thread instead of one of those moderator conspiracy threads.

Nope, it leads directly to two very simple questions you refuse to answer and continuously deflect from in order to avoid admitting your support of trust system abusers via inclusion in your trust list.

[1714249848]

1714249848

[1714249848]

1714249848

[suchmoon]

Nope, it leads directly to two very simple questions you refuse to answer and continuously deflect from in order to avoid admitting your support of trust system abusers via inclusion in your trust list.

More abuse of the forum reporting system to silence criticism:

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

TECSHARE: Am I always right?
suchmoon: No.
TECSHARE: You replied, but you didn't answer the question.

What a fucking clown. Oh wait, I can't call you that because using words that you have used would be "refractory". Oops, I did it again.

Next time when you ask a question please provide multiple choices so I can just tick a box to make you happy.

Is not my rating for Vod valid? Are Vod's negative ratings for me not invalid? Convenient you suddenly can't be bothered when a direct question is asked.

Please check applicable boxes:    

Is my rating for Vod valid?:         YES [ ]      NO [ x ]

Are Vod's ratings for me valid?:   YES [ ]      NO [ x ]

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Seems like you have done your research.

Been planning it ever since I had to walk in crutches 3 blocks twice a day in the coldest weather in 40 years, lol I am so ready to trade cold for snakes and corruption.

I'll put out a general call when I'm ready to sponsor those that would like to move to the area that will be least affected by climate change in the short to mid term.  

Suchmoon refuses to answer a direct question, so "some one" reports it to make sure they don't have to. Also a gif demonstrating Vod's sociopathic behavior in a humorous way, that clearly is disruptive and needs to be removed from a thread demonstrating Vod to be a liar. A humorous post about marlboroza was removed, and I also had a 7 year old post removed that was nothing more than a joke demonstrating some one is digging through years of my posts looking for peanuts in my turds to try to use against me.

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

I did the deal with NO.

Thats hot.

I can't wait to find out how you're gonna spin this one.

[TECSHARE]

~

Thank you for finally answering my questions directly. I will reply in the appropriate thread.

[TECSHARE]

~

Thank you for finally answering my questions directly.

Idiot. Your questions were directly answered days ago:

Is the rating I left for Vod valid or not? Are the ratings he left for me valid or not?

No and no.

You have passed the threshold from being subjectively to objectively a tool. You did this in order to play your stupid game of "gotcha," which you already lost.

I don't understand why anybody would conduct business with you knowing they run the risk of enduring your hard-headed stupidity if even the smallest nuance of a transaction should go awry, or even be debatable.

Actually the response was incomplete and ambiguous. "No" as in I refuse to answer? No as in your rating is not valid? No as in his rating is not valid? That was not an answer. There is no "gotcha" games, simply asking Suchmoon to clearly define their position, and pointing out that they are in fact supporting a trust system abuser based on their own words.

I do trades with people all the time, and I make sure each of my customers is happy, and always make sure I meet all of the obligations I agreed to. In between the abusive trust system ratings in attempt to silence criticism, you will find multiple pages of happy traders, but I am sure your little character impugning attacks are more convincing. Keep tryharding Nutilduuuuh. Maybe you can make up some more stories for tomorrow.

[TECSHARE]

Actually the response was incomplete and ambiguous. "No" as in I refuse to answer? No as in your rating is not valid? No as in his rating is not valid? That was not an answer. There is no "gotcha" games, simply asking Suchmoon to clearly define their position, and pointing out that they are in fact supporting a trust system abuser based on their own words.

Only a fool or someone incredibly dishonest would not consider "no" to be an answer to a "yes" or "no" question. So which one are you? Because you are definitely one or the other, if not both.

I know you have trouble with reading comprehension, but my explanation above is very self explanatory why the answer was ambiguous.

[nutildah]

Actually the response was incomplete and ambiguous. "No" as in I refuse to answer? No as in your rating is not valid? No as in his rating is not valid? That was not an answer. There is no "gotcha" games, simply asking Suchmoon to clearly define their position, and pointing out that they are in fact supporting a trust system abuser based on their own words.

Only a fool or someone incredibly dishonest would not consider "no" to be an answer to a "yes" or "no" question. So which one are you? Because you are definitely one or the other, if not both.

I know you have trouble with reading comprehension, but my explanation above is very self explanatory why the answer was ambiguous.

Because it is a testament to your intellectual dishonesty and generally inability to be honest, let's review what you just said. First of all, these were the questions being posed:

Is the rating I left for Vod valid or not? Are the ratings he left for me valid or not?

No and no.

Your claim is that these may be answers to _another question_ that existed only in your own head, and not the ones you specifically asked. You asked two "yes" or "no" questions, you received 2 "no" answers. To perceive these as being answers to any other question than the ones you specifically asked is simply illogical.

Whether you have a severe impairment in logic or are acting out of dishonesty is up for debate, though I tend to lean toward believing the latter in this instance.

[TECSHARE]

Of course if you edit the quote down, it is a lot less ambiguous. If you include the entire unedited quote it is not exactly clear. "no and no" is just as easily interpreted as a refusal to respond followed by more of a diatribe. Seems kind of like you are working overtime to find any excuse to point fingers Nutilduhhhh. Almost like you are motivated by your personal feelings for me rather than facts, but that's not you right Nutilduuuh?

Since you answered this question, please quote your answer for clarity, that is unless you are going to take another page from Vod's book and just keep claiming you did while never actually doing it.

Is the rating I left for Vod valid or not? Are the ratings he left for me valid or not?

No and no. Stop using theymos as a crutch when it suits you. He also said "it'd be best to forgive".

Until you, Og, and Vod start seriously working towards deescalation I can't be bothered to care about it anymore. Five minutes of being adults is all it takes. Look at Lauda+Quicksy = ♡. You can do it too, I believe in you, don't let me down.

[nutildah]

Of course if you edit the quote down, it is a lot less ambiguous. If you include the entire unedited quote it is not exactly clear. "no and no" is just as easily interpreted as a refusal to respond followed by more of a diatribe. Seems kind of like you are working overtime to find any excuse to point fingers Nutilduhhhh. Almost like you are motivated by your personal feelings for me rather than facts, but that's not you right Nutilduuuh?

You mean editing the post down to show the answers to your questions? If you include the entire unedited quote it is still quite clear to everybody who has an understanding of the English language and is capable of being honest. The answers were the very first part of the response, which you purposefully overlooked. You didn't like them, so you chose to play a stupid game, for which you won a stupid prize. And sorry to break your heart, but I don't have "personal feelings for you."

[SockyMcSockFace]

How did this whole "You didn't answer my question! Yes I did!" stuff start?

As far as I can tell, the full original (unedited) post from Suchmoon displays as
https://i.imgur.com/pyBX4bT.png

Suchmoon simply quoted your questions and then gave a direct "no and no" answer.

From the perspective of a 'popcorn munching observer', it was fairly obvious that Suchmoon believes both your rating and Vod's ratings are "not valid". (And that yourself, Vod and Og need to try being adults for 5 minutes). There doesn't seem to be any ambiguity that I can see.

I'll go sit in the corner quietly now. As you were.

[suchmoon]

Actually the response was incomplete and ambiguous. "No" as in I refuse to answer? No as in your rating is not valid? No as in his rating is not valid? That was not an answer. There is no "gotcha" games, simply asking Suchmoon to clearly define their position, and pointing out that they are in fact supporting a trust system abuser based on their own words.

There was no ambiguity at any point. If I wanted to say that I refuse to answer I would have said so, or not answered the questions or whatever. If I wanted to say that one is valid and the other is not, I would have said something to that effect. My position was clear well before you started your question game. Now you're continuing it in the other thread with more questions, including ones that I had already answered in the answer that you didn't accept as an answer. You're not interested in any answers or opinions, you just want to spin this into some sort of justification for your own misuse and abuse of the trust system.

[TECSHARE]

Anything to distract from the trust system abuse of your friends, Lauda and Vod.

[suchmoon]

Anything to distract from the trust system abuse of your friends, Lauda and Vod.

I disagree, I think you should cease those distractions. It's quite weird how you engage in all these tangential lies about something as trivial as a "no" as if you don't really care about trust abuse, just about your own ego.

[TECSHARE]

Anything to distract from the trust system abuse of your friends, Lauda and Vod.

I disagree, I think you should cease those distractions. It's quite weird how you engage in all these tangential lies about something as trivial as a "no" as if you don't really care about trust abuse, just about your own ego.

I would be happy to have a point by point discussion of any of these multiple instance of trust system abuse, but as you know one of your favorite past times is deflecting from the main issue of the topic with the very intent to create these diversions, which is exactly why I insisted on a very clear and unambiguous response. That is in fact me focusing on the facts of the matter and attempting to chase you down to do the same.

[suchmoon]

I would be happy to have a point by point discussion of any of these multiple instance of trust system abuse, but as you know one of your favorite past times is deflecting from the main issue of the topic with the very intent to create these diversions, which is exactly why I insisted on a very clear and unambiguous response. That is in fact me focusing on the facts of the matter and attempting to chase you down to do the same.

Oh, you were chasing me down by pretending you can't read, that's what it was... silly me, I though you were just being your usual obstinate troll.

Now would be a good time to stop making a fool of yourself and enjoy your DT1 position - all that hard trust-farming work finally paid off for you. Maybe we'll some of those mythical standards in action.

[TECSHARE]

I would be happy to have a point by point discussion of any of these multiple instance of trust system abuse, but as you know one of your favorite past times is deflecting from the main issue of the topic with the very intent to create these diversions, which is exactly why I insisted on a very clear and unambiguous response. That is in fact me focusing on the facts of the matter and attempting to chase you down to do the same.

Oh, you were chasing me down by pretending you can't read, that's what it was... silly me, I though you were just being your usual obstinate troll.

Now would be a good time to stop making a fool of yourself and enjoy your DT1 position - all that hard trust-farming work finally paid off for you. Maybe we'll some of those mythical standards in action.

You and your friends have demonstrated there is only more punitive action taken when I cede to ANY of your demands. Why so obstinate?

So now 9 years of work building a positive reputation = "trust farming"? Sounds more like you are annoyed you can't dictate to every single person who they should be adding to their trust list. Speaking of trust lists and standards, I noticed now that I demonstrated Vod had comitted a criminal act, you vaporized from that thread. I wonder why. Again, what is important is you don't like me, not that Vod, marlboroza, or Lauda are abusing the use of negative ratings as a form of retribution for speaking critically of them. Retribution only matters to you when it goes the way you don't like.

[andulolika]

I let the trust ratings slip because whores gonna be whores, but the flag she opened against me is completly fake, she just pasted the flag on a thread and people drops support from time to time.

[suchmoon]

So now 9 years of work building a positive reputation = "trust farming"? Sounds more like you are annoyed you can't dictate to every single person who they should be adding to their trust list.

No, including various shitheads just because they include you is what I meant by "farming". I'm not dictating anything, do whatever you want, just don't expect to be taken seriously with your "standards" and other BS when you included users like that.

Speaking of trust lists and standards, I noticed now that I demonstrated Vod had comitted a criminal act, you vaporized from that thread. I wonder why. Again, what is important is you don't like me, not that Vod, marlboroza, or Lauda are abusing the use of negative ratings as a form of retribution for speaking critically of them. Retribution only matters to you when it goes the way you don't like.

As opposed to what - me managing my trust lists exactly the way you like it?

Your theatrics would make more sense if e.g. you had been red-trusting for doxing or exposing account sellers in the past and not just when it suited you in your attacks against Vod and nutildah. On the other hand, you have a history of retaliatory and "non-standard" red trust in your personal squabbles like "You should focus on your own affairs instead of harassing others" and "I believe this user to be mentally ill". If it quacks like a duck and posts bullshit ratings like a duck, it shouldn't be in DT.

No idea why you keep blaming for anything Lauda-related but I'm sure there is an exciting conspiracy theory behind it - bring it on.

[truth or dare]

So now 9 years of work building a positive reputation = "trust farming"? Sounds more like you are annoyed you can't dictate to every single person who they should be adding to their trust list.

No, including various shitheads just because they include you is what I meant by "farming". I'm not dictating anything, do whatever you want, just don't expect to be taken seriously with your "standards" and other BS when you included users like that.

Speaking of trust lists and standards, I noticed now that I demonstrated Vod had comitted a criminal act, you vaporized from that thread. I wonder why. Again, what is important is you don't like me, not that Vod, marlboroza, or Lauda are abusing the use of negative ratings as a form of retribution for speaking critically of them. Retribution only matters to you when it goes the way you don't like.

As opposed to what - me managing my trust lists exactly the way you like it?

Your theatrics would make more sense if e.g. you had been red-trusting for doxing or exposing account sellers in the past and not just when it suited you in your attacks against Vod and nutildah. On the other hand, you have a history of retaliatory and "non-standard" red trust in your personal squabbles like "You should focus on your own affairs instead of harassing others" and "I believe this user to be mentally ill". If it quacks like a duck and posts bullshit ratings like a duck, it shouldn't be in DT.

No idea why you keep blaming for anything Lauda-related but I'm sure there is an exciting conspiracy theory behind it - bring it on.

Is suchmoons inclusions list full of confirmed scammers, probable extortionists, and those that admit to abusing the trust system ?

I don't think suchmoon has even dared ever do anything but support lauda and tmans scamming and trust abuse.

Either directly or just trying to derail and cast doubt upon their whistleblowers or those that complian about their trust abuse.

How dare anyone suggest he should not be supporting scammers and trust abusers.

Remember how suchmoon attacked Theymos for suggesting the scammer extortionist and shady escrow trust abuser lauda should be excluded.

Sorry suchmoon for suspecting you are complicit with these scammers and dirt bags.

Join The guild and demonstrate you want to see transparent objective standards or be correctly excluded and remain supporting the scamming dirt bags Until it is too late to redeem yourself.

Get rid of that chipmixer Sig it looks dreadful at your stage of membership here. Not another early dash supporter that's still destitute ?

Lauds is a trust abuser as are many on your includes list, top 20 fans and recipients of merit no doubt.

Come back from the dark side suchmoon.

[Vod]

Speaking of trust lists and standards, I noticed now that I demonstrated Vod had comitted a criminal act, you vaporized from that thread.

I encourage all people to "vaporize" from threads where blind accusations are made without proof.

If I have "comitted" a criminal act, join OG in a lawsuit, liar.

[Timelord2067]

As I update my thread tracking Lauda's Fake Flags I will, from now on, be naming those who are supporting Lauda's fake flags:

Reserved #1

Comment:

Flag 712: @bobitza , @ChuckBuck , @Enre , @JollyGood , @RBF , @rhomelmabini , @robelneo , @sabotag3x , @ScamViruS are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5161689.msg53951875#msg53951875

Flag 1260: @AlexSimion , @joksim299 , @nullius , @TheUltraElite , @TMAN , are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5161689.msg53951875#msg53951875

-<Echo chamber>-

-<Echo chamber>-

-<Echo chamber>-
Come back from the dark side suchmoon (we have cookies) FIFY.
-<Echo chamber>-

Might need to turn the -<Echo chamber>- down a little bit before you start offering cookies.