by rallier

[eddie13]

Users just tagged me with the following:

Lauda   2020-02-12   Reference   He is manipulating the Default Trust system of the forum for his own benefit. Making false accusations. IMHO, I do not recommend to make a connection (or work) with him that who is working as a capital

Stuff like this needs to stop.  

But... I mean... Isn't that about exactly the same thing you tagged TECSHARE for?
So it's ok when you do it, but not ok when someone else does it to you?

You PM users all the time recommending them to change their trust lists, and even have threads dedicated to trying to get other users to copy your trust list..
Pot calling the kettle black..


"He is manipulating the Default Trust system of the forum for his own benefit. Making false accusations."
This is just as true of you, if not more, than your tag on TS is of him..

[Lauda]

But... I mean... Isn't that about exactly the same thing you tagged TECSHARE for?
So it's ok when you do it, but not when someone else does it to you?

My rating on TECSHARE has nothing to do with the rating the user in question left me. Can people please stop trying to divert my threads into off-topic discussions? I purposely left out self-mod and local thread rules for fairness, and this is what one gets.. sigh.

[eddie13]

But... I mean... Isn't that about exactly the same thing you tagged TECSHARE for?
So it's ok when you do it, but not when someone else does it to you?

My rating on TECSHARE has nothing to do with the rating the user in question left me. Can people please stop trying to divert my threads into off-topic discussions? I purposely left out self-mod and local thread rules for fairness, and this is what one gets.. sigh.

I find it entirely on topic that you are defending yourself here from a tactic of which "precedent" you set yourself..

Stuff like this needs to stop.  

You'd have much more legitimacy speaking against these actions if you didn't do the same exact thing yourself..

[Lauda]

I hereby kindly ask you to stop responding to this thread. Thanks. The thread must remain on-topic otherwise it's pointless and can be archived/removed.

[TECSHARE]

But... I mean... Isn't that about exactly the same thing you tagged TECSHARE for?
So it's ok when you do it, but not when someone else does it to you?

My rating on TECSHARE has nothing to do with the rating the user in question left me. Can people please stop trying to divert my threads into off-topic discussions? I purposely left out self-mod and local thread rules for fairness, and this is what one gets.. sigh.

I find it entirely on topic that you are defending yourself here from a tactic of which "precedent" you set yourself..

Stuff like this needs to stop.  

You'd have much more legitimacy speaking against these actions if you didn't do the same exact thing yourself..

This is the exact point I was making about Vod 5 years ago. These people want a system that has no hard and fast rules. They want to define the rules on the fly by mob rule. They then want to set the precedent for tagging people as they please, but then never want the precedent enforced against them. This is why I have been arguing forever for subjective evidence of theft, violation of contract, or violation of applicable laws before rating. How the fuck is anyone supposed to follow the rules with people like this setting precedents? Even the people who want to couldn't possibly comply because they are ever changing, arbitrarily, and selectively enforced.

[johhnyUA]

Getting 0.0375 btc weekly is enough to fuck the forum.

What greed makes with some people. It's very funny to believe that everything is rotating around Chipmixer and people with "deep DT voting power"

[Blacknavy]

Getting 0.0375 btc weekly is enough to fuck the forum.

What greed makes with some people. It's very funny to believe that everything is rotating around Chipmixer and people with "deep DT voting power"

You should continue to reinforce your privacy, maybe you can get a slot. Mading up fake stories, defamation someone, giving people redtrusts or distrusts without reason is okay for gangs. Everyone sees very well what's going on here. I hope the Bitcoins all you earned are worth to defame other ones. I’m out of this topic now.

[Timelord2067]

I hereby kindly ask you to stop responding to this thread. Thanks. The thread must remain on-topic otherwise it's pointless and can be archived/removed.

What happened to you Lauda?

I've just had a scroll back through my PM's and had a read of the few dozen PM's we've exchanged in the past.  You used to be respectful and would seek out other's help finding alts or scammers.  You would give red trust feedback where appropriate and you built up a profile of a respectable person.

Then, you either got onto staff first or started lashing out at others once you attained a certain level (we'll call it DT for short) and you suddenly saw shadows move across your computer screen - you wanted to set others up in "stings" (you even sough my help on one such occasion but didn't disclose why you wanted my information) and your ride down the slippery slope began.  Being paid to wear a signature while posting threads such as this hurts the advertisers whether you realise it or not.

It's clear to quite a few of us that you are exhausted and need to take some time off.  Clear your head - go for a walk - in the rain even.

[allahabadi]

What happened to you Lauda?~

Looks like people are finally noticing.

[truth or dare]

Users just tagged me with the following:

Lauda   2020-02-12   Reference   He is manipulating the Default Trust system of the forum for his own benefit. Making false accusations. IMHO, I do not recommend to make a connection (or work) with him that who is working as a capital

Reference being: http://loyce.club/trust/2020-01-25_Sat_05.12h/152486.html, i.e. he tagged me for excluding him.

by rallier's judgement is Trusted by:
1. TECSHARE (Trust: +31 / =4 / -3) (DT1 (-4) 618 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. yussuf89 (Trust: neutral) (30 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. srknbyr (Trust: neutral) (79 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. Lydian (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (152 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. owlcatz (Trust: +40 / =0 / -1) (DT1! (23) 260 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. cabsav (Trust: neutral) (68 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. ekiller (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1 (-4) 307 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. alpsea (Trust: +1 / =0 / -2) (48 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. Aqualung89 (Trust: neutral) (23 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. Defloration (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Aceeakell (Trust: neutral) (44 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. otto_diesel (Trust: +1 / =1 / -2) (DT1 (-4) 445 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. bobita (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1 (-3) 411 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Vispilio (Trust: +6 / =0 / -1) (DT1 (-2) 824 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. wolwoo (Trust: +2 / =2 / -3) (DT1 (-9) 443 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. AlyattesLydia (Trust: neutral) (455 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. Leteravian (Trust: neutral) (158 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. leprakon (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. Bthd (Trust: neutral) (194 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. heyhat (Trust: neutral) (5 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Stuff like this needs to stop.  

For transparency, my response is a neutral rating:

Lauda   2020-02-13   Reference   Tagged me for exercising my right of excluding users from my trust list, and therefore shows untrustworthy judgement. I would avoid dealing with such users.

Which part of this is incorrect? theymos wants you to be blacklisted from default trust, such is your negative impact upon its usefulness. That, and you were revealed to be sending PMs to other members demanding they remove members from their trust lists for taking actions theymos confirmed were correct, and beneficial for the trust system.

Please stop looking like a hypocrite.

Timelord obviously has not done his homework either, or is incapable of digesting clear evidence or early warning signs regarding Laura's true nature.

Perhaps you should be pushing for objective standards of evidence and a moving over to the flagging system. Where a member will need provide objective evidence directly related to scamming or attempting to scam. Then this specific incident would not have taken place.

You will not do that, because it will remove your own opportunity to abuse other members accounts.

[Timelord2067]

Timelord obviously has not done his homework either

...are you sure about that?

[truth or dare]

Timelord obviously has not done his homework either

...are you sure about that?

Yes 100% certain. If you had, then you would recognise that a little walk in the rain is not going to reset lauda to the trustworthy dependable and honest member that he never was from the very start.

The rain would likely wash away the remaining fragments of the guise this dangerous and abusive member has attempted to drape himself in to dupe others that he is here for any reason other than to take as much as he can as quickly as he can, by any means possible, that they can get away with.

I watched him arrive and will not be sorry to see him leave.

Unless there has been mass editing of his beginings here, you will not have a problem finding what you need to debunk your ' a walk in the rain back to credible useful and honest member' theory.

The red trust in question here is more valid than much of The red lauda has left for others. Hence by his own clear standards the red he has been left is clearly useful.

Well done to the member that has the confidence to do what many DT legends avoid doing themselves out of fear, rather than what they really believe is best for the community.

If you honestly believe lauda is female you have not endured the original laudaM.

[posi]

A lot have been said and i don't think we're here to complain about the situation cause it will only dig out somethijeopardy se among user, what we need now is solution not something that will jeopardize the forum in the future. But i totally support the reduction of DT1 to 100 and enforcement of old DT system which seems to the forum peaceful.

Getting 0.0375 btc weekly is enough to fuck the forum.

What greed makes with some people. It's very funny to believe that everything is rotating around Chipmixer and people with "deep DT voting power"

You might be right but i don't support the part of including a company name because this is something that has to do with the forum users not the company.

[by rallier]

Users just tagged me with the following:

Lauda   2020-02-12   Reference   He is manipulating the Default Trust system of the forum for his own benefit. Making false accusations. IMHO, I do not recommend to make a connection (or work) with him that who is working as a capital

Reference being: http://loyce.club/trust/2020-01-25_Sat_05.12h/152486.html, i.e. he tagged me for excluding him.

by rallier's judgement is Trusted by:
1. TECSHARE (Trust: +31 / =4 / -3) (DT1 (-4) 618 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. yussuf89 (Trust: neutral) (30 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. srknbyr (Trust: neutral) (79 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. Lydian (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (152 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. owlcatz (Trust: +40 / =0 / -1) (DT1! (23) 260 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. cabsav (Trust: neutral) (68 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. ekiller (Trust: +3 / =0 / -0) (DT1 (-4) 307 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. alpsea (Trust: +1 / =0 / -2) (48 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
9. Aqualung89 (Trust: neutral) (23 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
10. Defloration (Trust: +0 / =0 / -2) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
11. Aceeakell (Trust: neutral) (44 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
12. otto_diesel (Trust: +1 / =1 / -2) (DT1 (-4) 445 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
13. bobita (Trust: +1 / =0 / -0) (DT1 (-3) 411 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
14. Vispilio (Trust: +6 / =0 / -1) (DT1 (-2) 824 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
15. wolwoo (Trust: +2 / =2 / -3) (DT1 (-9) 443 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
16. AlyattesLydia (Trust: neutral) (455 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
17. Leteravian (Trust: neutral) (158 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
18. leprakon (Trust: neutral) (0 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
19. Bthd (Trust: neutral) (194 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
20. cryptobenn (Trust: +0 / =0 / -1) (1 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
21. heyhat (Trust: neutral) (5 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Stuff like this needs to stop.  

For transparency, my response is a neutral rating:

Lauda   2020-02-13   Reference   Tagged me for exercising my right of excluding users from my trust list and therefore shows untrustworthy judgment. I would avoid dealing with such users.

Hey Lauda, I mentioned above but I think you don'T understand it's not just about "tagging", it's about tagging someone with "distrust". Saying someone to untrusted that doesn'T mean to you don't know him, it means you knew him untrustful.
So I am fully exactly to be sure about you don't know me because we don't have any friendly or commercial relationship. So if you tagged me "untrusted" with any excuses with a solid stand, it means you are doing it for your own benefits. On bitcointalk forum there are 1m+ users, Do you tag all users who don't you know personally? No.
People are expecting "trust mechanism" from old-well-known users that they build. But you are acting as a cyber cop that you think. Also, Adolf Hitler thought he was right.
So why we are here.

Small Print: I don't care what people feel about me, but you cannot talk about trust who you don't know ) I don't read these topics, If someone didn't send me that link, I never know that this thread. I never visit again, so you can think or talk whatever you want.
Also, I noticed some people act like a racist (I don't mentioned to Lauda here, they know themselves) In the year 2020, we are in the Bitcointalk Forum about cryptocurrency that new form of money. So they are still racist. Comedy-drama movie from AD 1600-1700

[Timelord2067]

If you honestly believe lauda is female you have not endured the original laudaM.

I've said time and time again if you look at what Lauda says about women, then you'll know that Lauda is a man.


As to the rest of your comments, they seem to be directed at someone else or are simply thought bubbles, so I won't dwell on them any further except to say I don't expect Lauda to change, but I've at least made the suggestion.

[TMAN]

I've said time and time again if you look at what Lauda says about women, then you'll know that Lauda is a man.

Lauda has tits... manboobs or double D's ill let your imagination decide

[marlboroza]

Hey Lauda, I mentioned above but I think you don'T understand it's not just about "tagging", it's about tagging someone with "distrust".

So if you tagged me "untrusted" with any excuses with a solid stand, it means you are doing it for your own benefits.

Someone excluding you means they don't think your judgement is good or you are excluded for some other reasons.

So I am fully exactly to be sure about you don't know me because we don't have any friendly or commercial relationship. So if you tagged me "untrusted" with any excuses with a solid stand, it means you are doing it for your own benefits. On bitcointalk forum there are 1m+ users, Do you tag all users who don't you know personally? No.

Apples and oranges. You should really learn how DT works. There are few threads in meta about it.

cyber cop

Also, Adolf Hitler thought he was right.

some people act like a racist

So they are still racist.

Oh, it is nazi/racist/cop card again. /ignored

[xolxol]

oh wow is this new?not only lauda but the abusive people from her circle abuses the system,theymos should take actions regarding this a long time ago lets say we take a vote whom to be blacklisted indefinitely or maybe permanently.

[JollyGood]

The handful of imbeciles from the Turkish language board that momentarily manipulated their way to DT1 with their merit abuse and fake trust circle were always trying to get on to the Chipmixer campaign, that was their ultimate aim and for that reason along with frustration and anger towards those that held them to account, they decided to cause as much havoc as they could in revenge for not being able to get on the Chipmixer campaign.

Getting 0.0375 btc weekly is enough to fuck the forum.

What greed makes with some people. It's very funny to believe that everything is rotating around Chipmixer and people with "deep DT voting power"

[TECSHARE]

Someone excluding you means they don't think your judgement is good or you are excluded for some other reasons.

Reminds me of politicians writing The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act

"Public Law 107-56
107th Congress

                                 An Act

To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes."

I wonder what those "other reasons" could be. It could literally be anything.