[Cult of Lauda] An historic peace: Rome’s treaty with Carthage

[suchmoon]

~

Big words. Sadly it's mostly a projection. I'm rooting for you though, maybe one day you'll start practicing what you preach.

[DireWolfM14]

The trust system in many ways is a (possibly failing) libertarian dream

This system is a pure democracy

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

 

[TECSHARE]

~

Big words. Sadly it's mostly a projection. I'm rooting for you though, maybe one day you'll start practicing what you preach.

Yep, I am a big old meanie for holding people to the same obsessive and meddling standards they hold others to. Especially when it is one of your pals.

The trust system in many ways is a (possibly failing) libertarian dream

This system is a pure democracy

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

You clearly slept through your social studies classes in middle school.

[suchmoon]

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.

Yep, I am a big old meanie for holding people to the same obsessive and meddling standards they hold others to. Especially when it is one of your pals.

It doesn't matter what excuse you have for it. That red trust is bullshit regardless of who it is against. Your support of such bullshit ratings makes your whole posturing about "standards" worthless.

[TECSHARE]

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.

Except if you want to build a reputation for trade under this system, then you are directly penalized for not participating in it by having positive trust ratings left for you being less visible.

[SatSnatcher]

Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system

DWM14 does have a bit of a point here but I would say more like "the complete lack of a DT system"..
The space to leave notes is not the thing, but rather it is the weight the notes carry if made by certain individuals, and how they got that weight, IMO..

I do like the DT system a lot, but it got quite an unfair start between the initial start of the merit system, concentration of merits to a certain area/board/group, to the initial start of the new DT system, with a group of those protesting the old DT system by creating their own custom trust lists before it was even implemented, having quite a head start..

I still respect theymos a lot, and I think he is trying hard not to put himself in the place of a king here by keeping his hands off of the trust system, and letting it go where it goes, even if he doesn't always agree with its direction..

Though this removing Lauda from his exclusions list move has me really questioning the direction that I see he may hope it will go in..
Quite a wrench thrown into the matrix of what I thought was going on around here, so I have to think again about some things..

[DireWolfM14]

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.

Agreed, but one individual going at it alone doesn't change the fact that the system works because of the votes of those who participate.  Like a democratic republic, those who don't participate must live with the consequences of their inaction.

Except if you want to build a reputation for trade under this system, then you are directly penalized for not participating in it by having positive trust ratings left for you being less visible.

I'm afraid you will never get it.  The trust system isn't about you, and your precious rating's visibility.  And, I did in fact pay attention to my civics classes.  Just because this democratic republic has rejected you as one of it's representatives doesn't make any less of one.

[TECSHARE]

Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system

DWM14 does have a bit of a point here but I would say more like "the complete lack of a DT system"..

No, he doesn't. He is operating off of the stereotype that libertarianism is like anarchy, it is nothing of the sort. Libertarians still support a system of rights, law, and justice, they just think it should be absolutely minimal as possible.

Except if you want to build a reputation for trade under this system, then you are directly penalized for not participating in it by having positive trust ratings left for you being less visible.

I'm afraid you will never get it.  The trust system isn't about you, and your precious rating's visibility.  And, I did in fact pay attention to my civics classes.  Just because this democratic republic has rejected you as one of it's representatives doesn't make any less of one.

I am afraid you have fooled yourself in order to relieve the cognitive dissonance resulting from your hypocrisy. If this was a democratic republic I would have the right to due process and my accusers would have to substantiate their accusations rather than just make a bunch of them until they can find a story plausible enough to stick for the mob to grab a hold of and run with. You will never get it. The only reason you think everything is fine is because you haven't yet been the target of it. Of course there is also the little matter of the fact that I have 8 years of effort invested into my reputation here, and you just showed up, what a year ago? Easy to be casual with a tiny fraction of the time and effort at stake. When it is you I am sure all of a sudden it will be a travesty. Also the fact that I agitate you doesn't make my argument invalid.

P.S. You better find those principles soon before Nutilduhhh gives your poor goat a prolapse.

[DireWolfM14]

No, he doesn't.

Yes, I do.

I am afraid you have fooled yourself in order to relieve the cognitive dissonance resulting from your hypocrisy.

Is that an accusation you've yet to substantiate?

If this was a democratic republic I would have the right to due process and my accusers would have to substantiate their accusations rather than just make a bunch of them until they can find a story plausible enough to stick for the mob to grab a hold of and run with.

Has your "right to due process" been stripped from you?  Have you been unable to plead your case?  Have others not come to your defense (including myself?)  Accusers be accusing, you be defending, haters be hating.  Where does "due process" even come into play here?

[TECSHARE]

No, he doesn't.

Yes, I do.

I am afraid you have fooled yourself in order to relieve the cognitive dissonance resulting from your hypocrisy.

Is that an accusation you've yet to substantiate?

If this was a democratic republic I would have the right to due process and my accusers would have to substantiate their accusations rather than just make a bunch of them until they can find a story plausible enough to stick for the mob to grab a hold of and run with.

Has your "right to due process" been stripped from you?  Have you been unable to plead your case?  Have others not come to your defense (including myself?)  Accusers be accusing, you be defending, haters be hating.  Where does "due process" even come into play here?

Nah, you really don't. How cute, you can be senseless and refractory. Yes, it has. There is no evidence to support the claims made against me the negative ratings are based on, and the ones who left them refuse to substantiate them. Maybe Google due process, I am not your 5th grade Social Studies teacher. You defending me? Cool story bro. Too bad you still enable this abuse by including those individuals. Kind of like talking about how you need to go on a diet as you continue eating a tub of ice cream from the carton.

[allahabadi]

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

I agree with the view on Libertarianism, but fail to understand how a pure democracy wud leave theymos as the only DT1 member?
Also the current DT1 is representative democracy and if you take into account the laddered DT2 and DT3; then IMHO it looks like a Preferential Voting Democracy.

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.

Although, it is True that the Trust system doesn't prevent anyone from researching for themselves; but it cannot be denied it does provide a semblance of security for dealers on the forum, especially noobs. Thus, to relegate it to a position of utmost irrelevance would be quite a misnomer IMHO. The Trust system is broken and beyond repair as long as we are unable to deny the human element in its assertion (which can't be denied). So, at the end of the day it is To Each His Own.

[TECSHARE]

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

I agree with the view on Libertarianism, but fail to understand how a pure democracy wud leave theymos as the only DT1 member?
Also the current DT1 is representative democracy and if you take into account the laddered DT2 and DT3; then IMHO it looks like a Preferential Voting Democracy.

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.

Although, it is True that the Trust system doesn't prevent anyone from researching for themselves; but it cannot be denied it does provide a semblance of security for dealers on the forum, especially noobs. Thus, to relegate it to a position of utmost irrelevance would be quite a misnomer IMHO. The Trust system is broken and beyond repair as long as we are unable to deny the human element in its assertion (which can't be denied). So, at the end of the day it is To Each His Own.

The trust system is broken because Theymos refuses to restrict the trust system to purely objective uses and ignores the human element.  He had an opportunity to change that with the introduction of the flag system, but he wasted that perpetuating the same flaws that caused its failure to begin with. I warned that the ability to use the system for ambiguous reasons would result in its failure, but he persisted. Unfortunately this thing is such a mess now I am not sure it can be salvaged.