Trust System Abuse By Nullius

[suchmoon]

Statistical evidence of success (and/or withholding knowledge) =/= arguing from authority. It's again one of those times, one we had last month. The rating on Kalemder will stand. Don't waste time arguing this, move on to other parts of this situation. Thanks.

It's been 4+ months since the referenced events, what's the rush to tag him now and not wait until you're ready to un-withhold the knowledge?

[1714136873]

1714136873

[Lauda]

It's been 4+ months since the referenced events, what's the rush to tag him now and not wait until you're ready to un-withhold the knowledge?

Sorry, am getting lost. I wasn't aware of this evidence nor this user I think.

Many post updates, please update only to latest.

Also, you did not complain this much about any unstated evidence on PN7 = QS. This is a double-standard.

[nullius]

Although the discussion of Lauda’s tag is important in itself, it is not the key issue here.  At least as of Loyce’s last scrape, suchmoon was ~Lauda, and had been for some time.  It would at least be consistent for suchmoon to both ~nullius and ~Lauda, even if I think it is wrong.

Whereas the issue that suchmoon has been consistently avoiding is that I supported two negatives (plus the implication of a neutral that said to be “countered”—hereby irrelevant; I assume it was a negative downgraded to neutral).  One is Lauda’s.  The other is Vod’s.  Whereas suchmoon is not only not ~Vod, but positively includes him.

I have repeatedly said that my position will not change:  suchmoon, go ahead and ~nullius, just as long as you also ~Vod because it’s also his tag that I am supporting.

And Vod’s tag is not about trolling.*  It is about trust abuse.

(* Actually, I think that Lauda’s tag is about more than trolling as it seems it’s being characterized; but I will set that aside for now.)

Parenthetically, I must note that nutildah’s referenced evidence of trust system abuse by TECSHARE, which I quoted fully above, is in my opinion far stronger than the evidence that nutildah presented against PrimeNumber7’s identity—evidence which suchmoon did not consider to be inadequate.  (To avoid a red herring, I emphasize that I am only comparing evidence by nutildah that was deemed adequate by suchmoon; hilarious’ separate evidence on PN7 is irrelevant in this thread, as is the PN7 issue generally.)

I briefly set forth the above, yet again, in the hope that the discussion will not continue to be diverted away from this issue.


As the thread stands, it seems the outcome must be a choice between the following:

• suchmoon excludes me for a tag that says on its face that it is supporting two tags, one of which she agrees with—whereas it is clear that I would have made the tag if either Lauda’s trolling-tag or Vod’s trust-abuse tag existed.  Excluding me for a tag that you partly agree with, partly disagree with, is not a sound exercise of judgment.
• suchmoon excludes me for a tag that she wholly disagrees with, but fails to exclude both the authors of the tags that I am supporting.
• suchmoon fairly excludes everybody who has made these tags contradicting her standards.  I would not argue further with this.  I would think it’s wrong; but this is one point where I would simply “agree to disagree”.
• After having been on good terms with me since 2018 without any specific criticism of my tags, suchmoon searches my sent feedback history for new reasons to exclude me in the manner of a prosecutor with a vendetta who decides, “We’ve got to get this guy for something!”  I will avoid commenting on how corrupt I think that would be.
  
  

  a singular rating which you disagree
  

  
  Definitely not a single rating in nullius' case. At least one other was already mentioned in this thread, and that's just for the last two days. There are 3 or 4 other reds that I consider inappropriate so for me that makes the signal-to-noise ratio bad enough for an exclusion.

Some of these options are mutually exclusive; some may overlap with others.  Any which way, I really do not see any other options here; suggestions would be duly appreciated.

[eddie13]

-

perfect description of the situation.

it looks like nullius got kicked off DT2

Kalemder

Hey thanks

Well that was quicker and easier than I expected and I didn't even cast a vote yet..

I'm still looking for a good ref to evidence against Kalemder..
I don't understand it..

suchmoon is not only not ~Vod, but positively includes him.

And Vod’s tag is not about trolling.

Parenthetically, I must note that nutildah’s referenced evidence of trust system abuse by TECSHARE, which I quoted fully above, is in my opinion far stronger than the evidence that nutildah presented against PrimeNumber7’s identity

suchmoon excludes me for a tag that says on its face that it is supporting two tags, one of which she agrees with

Vod has a very long history here of positive contributions despite the fact that he has gone off the rails lately..
Maybe SM doesn't see fit to remove/exclude him yet.. Also it is not like any of us agree with every opinion of those we include.. It is always some compromise.

Vod's tag is probably retaliation against TS for the OGnasty situation..

nutildah’s reference is a nothingburger.. All assumptions..

SM including Vod does not necessarily mean SM agrees with all Vods ratings..
As I said Vod has a long history of positive contributions therefore is harder to see him as net-negative.. You however have almost zero history and therefore the relativity of agree/disagree with you could be much higher...

Notice I haven't even excluded Vod despite calling out his recent shit because I hope he can get over himself yet..
I haven't even excluded you because I am conservative with my exclusions.. Yet..

[suchmoon]

Sorry, am getting lost. I wasn't aware of this evidence nor this user I think.

So no reason to rush then?

Also, you did not complain this much about any unstated evidence on PN7 = QS. This is a double-standard.

I didn't red-trust PN7. Or am I supposed to complain about something that you didn't state in your red trust on PN7?

At any rate, that's hardly relevant to what should be done here, i.e. clean up after nullius.

[figmentofmyass]

Also, DYOR =/= following my reference.

since i can't find any evidence, i can only speculate. i don't see anything obvious besides perhaps him having trust inclusions that you didn't/don't like (like tecshare and Vispilio).

you're essentially arguing from authority, say

Statistical evidence of success (and/or withholding knowledge) =/= arguing from authority. It's again one of those times, one we had last month. The rating on Kalemder will stand.

isn't that just saying "trust me, i've been right before"?

Seriously? Those arguing against it: Find a single, objectively non-deceptive, and objectively non-malicious reason for this and I will reconsider my tag (even though this is a single example of many).

personally, i add people to my trust list where i want to see their feedback + those they trust by default. i exclude people for the same reason. is that provably malicious or deceptive?

I'm still looking for a good ref to evidence against Kalemder..
I don't understand it..

+1

[suchmoon]

As the thread stands, it seems the outcome must be a choice between the following:

5. No more red tags or flags for opinions.

I can only dream.

[Vod]

None of the accusations made against me by Vod, Nutilduh, Lauda, or you have any basis in reality whatsoever

My rating is 100% correct - you manipulated your way into DT.  Even the Administrator of this forum believes you have no place there.

None of the feedback you have left is factual.  Believing you are a doctor and can read minds should also be a concern to anyone trading with you.  :/

[TECSHARE]

None of the accusations made against me by Vod, Nutilduh, Lauda, or you have any basis in reality whatsoever

My rating is 100% correct - you manipulated your way into DT.  Even the Administrator of this forum believes you have no place there.

None of the feedback you have left is factual.  Believing you are a doctor and can read minds should also be a concern to anyone trading with you.  :/

As with all of your accusations against me here and in the past, you have zero substantiation to support them. You have been rightfully tagged for doxing and using government agencies as a weapon to fight your petty grudge matches. Speaking of the administrator of this forum, here is what he had to say about your actions:


Theymos:
"I was disgusted by the reckless and vicious doxing in this case, where:
 - The evidence was very thin.
 - Even if all of the allegations were true, it'd likely result only in civil penalties, not criminal.
 - The whole thing was motivated merely by past arguments. OgNasty never caused Vod to even lose anything, as far as I know. An utterly ridiculous & disproportionate escalation.
 - It's based on the premise that purely statutory crimes are directly unethical, which I don't agree with at all, though I'm willing to mostly look past this as subjective...

Red-trusting Vod over this is an appropriate usage of red-trust, since his actions here are highly trust-relevant..."


You have abused the trust system against me several times in the past as documented here, refusing to substantiate anything, and being forced to remove your frivolous abusive ratings. Your current rating is equally unsubstantiated and just an extension of your past abuse of the trust system.

[Vod]

Theymos:
"I was disgusted by the reckless and vicious doxing in this case, where:
 - The evidence was very thin.
 - Even if all of the allegations were true, it'd likely result only in civil penalties, not criminal.
 - The whole thing was motivated merely by past arguments. OgNasty never caused Vod to even lose anything, as far as I know. An utterly ridiculous & disproportionate escalation.
 - It's based on the premise that purely statutory crimes are directly unethical, which I don't agree with at all, though I'm willing to mostly look past this as subjective...

Red-trusting Vod over this is an appropriate usage of red-trust, since his actions here are highly trust-relevant.  But I tend to think that since he edited his post and seems to genuinely regret at least the public doxxing part, it'd be best to forgive."

You are going against the wishes of the admin, which is not suprising, since he knows you don't belong on DT.  Also notice your ability to change the subject title and write what you like!

Thanks.   

[TECSHARE]

Theymos:
"I was disgusted by the reckless and vicious doxing in this case, where:
 - The evidence was very thin.
 - Even if all of the allegations were true, it'd likely result only in civil penalties, not criminal.
 - The whole thing was motivated merely by past arguments. OgNasty never caused Vod to even lose anything, as far as I know. An utterly ridiculous & disproportionate escalation.
 - It's based on the premise that purely statutory crimes are directly unethical, which I don't agree with at all, though I'm willing to mostly look past this as subjective...

Red-trusting Vod over this is an appropriate usage of red-trust, since his actions here are highly trust-relevant.  But I tend to think that since he edited his post and seems to genuinely regret at least the public doxxing part, it'd be best to forgive."

You are going against the wishes of the admin, which is not suprising, since he knows you don't belong on DT.  Also notice your ability to change the subject title and write what you like!

Thanks.   

Yet even more unsubstantiated claims. That is your MO, shit out as many accusations as possible, substantiate nothing resting assured that people will claim you are a "valuable member" of the community and excuse your endless abusive behavior.

[Vod]

Yet even more unsubstantiated claims.

Theymos has stated you don't belong on DT, probably because you misquote him constantly.

Not unsubstantiated at all. 

Now the question is - why does he distrust you, but trust OG, who has stolen from the forum, and investors.  Did you not give him a cut of your loot? 

[marlboroza]

Counter for counter, that's new for sure.

Counter to counters by figmentofmyass, BayAreaCoins, and eddie13. [...] The feedback provided by by Lauda, Vod, and marlboroza is factually based[...]

As I stated before I highly suspect this user is an alt of one of the usual members that is involved in a lot of this drama as they mysteriously appeared after very long periods of inactivity with a change in language, demeanor, and suddenly hold all the same opinions of the people listed above.

Please ~nullius as they have no idea how the trust system should be used and are clearly just being used to game the system with alts.

Ok, so you want nullius to be excluded because you think they are alt account of one of accounts above and by simply elimination of users who tagged you VS users who countered tag, you are saying that either Vod, Lauda or me used alt account nullius to game system. Well, nullius is not my alt for sure, so you are talking about Lauda or Vod, unless you are talking about someone else. Your topic is very confusing. Who is nullius?

Please provide more information for this request.

[TECSHARE]

@Vod & @marlboroza



Thanks, you two are doing more to discredit your own accusations than I ever could. Keep it up.

[Vod]

Thanks, you two are doing more to discredit your own accusations than I ever could. Keep it up.

Stopping your trust abuse could do more to discredit our accusations.

You always default to dishonesty for some reason.  :/

[Lauda]

I'll be rewriting my feedback on OP in the short future to clarify that it's not related to trolling, because it isn't, and never was, and it seems that a lot of people are confused by it. Dishonesty and manipulative behavior (both or which are per definition a user's actions, not a user's opinions) are more than appropriate for negative ratings on DT1 and DT2.

Thank you for the discussion.

[TECSHARE]

I'll be rewriting my feedback on OP in the short future to clarify that it's not related to trolling, because it isn't, and never was, and it seems that a lot of people are confused by it. Dishonesty and manipulative behavior (both or which are per definition a user's actions, not a user's opinions) are more than appropriate for negative ratings on DT1 and DT2.

Thank you for the discussion.

Cool story bro. Leave a rating because you don't like what I have to say, then just refine your lies to further justify it. Your rating still has zero basis in fact.

[Vod]

Cool story bro. Leave a rating because you don't like what I have to say, then just refine your lies to further justify it. Your rating still has zero basis in fact.

As does yours Techy.   

[johhnyUA]

I know that gifs is not welcomed on this forum, but i had to show how all of this drama with Vod and TECSHARE looks like for another people





P.S:
Nullius, please stop to create another drama. After your return there wasn't any useful topic (maybe except Project Anastasia and some thoughts about Chipmixer and privacy) from you (if we compare with your first visit here). Only drama on drama which riding a drama.

[marlboroza]

@Vod & @marlboroza

Thanks, you two are doing more to discredit your own accusations than I ever could. Keep it up.

If you want to talk about accounts Vod and marlboroza create new thread.
As I said, I have no idea what you are talking about:

I highly suspect this user is an alt of one of the usual members that is involved in a lot of this drama

Are you trying to say that nullius is your alt account?

as they mysteriously appeared after very long periods of inactivity with a change in language, demeanor, and suddenly hold all the same opinions of the people listed above.

1) when that long period of inactivity happened?
2) what has changed in their language?
3) what has changed in their behavior?
4) users are not allowed to hold the same opinions or something?

Please ~nullius as they have no idea how the trust system should be used and are clearly just being used to game the system with alts.

Provide evidence of "CLEARLY being used to game system with alts" for exclusion purposes.