madnessteat

[Lauda]

I am really tired of people trying to manipulate their way out of my trust lists via PMs. I am dumping the whole PM conversation with madnessteat.

Hi, Lauda. You bet me again "~". Last time I got a tilde in connection with some fictional conspiracy in the Russian locale. Then you removed it. May I ask why you gave me the squiggle again? I'm not used to putting tilds back or personal dislike, so I decided to ask. Do you not trust my investigations into forum abuse or my feedback? Or you don't want me on the DT list?

Hello.

I'd need more context on what you're talking about? Either you were always ~excluded in the Cult of Lauda list or you weren't. I just had an empty list for long. I need more context on who you are, who your inclusions are, etc.

Hello. Maybe something will remind you of this topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5102731.msg49444890#msg49444890. But I'll tell you right away that I didn't participate in any conspiracy and didn't put a tilde to you or TMAN and how I got into DT and got a red paint bottle I started to clean the Russian locale from different abuses. Me and Ratimov painted all the sellers and buyers of accounts, if I have enough time, I investigate the bounty Abuzes and find the hacked or sold accounts. You can see my feedback they will tell you a lot about me.

Here's my trust list: http://loyce.club/trust/2020-02-01_Sat_05.15h/1894120.html.

Many Russians, but that is fine.

Coin-1 (Trust: neutral) (712 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
28. DIKUL (Trust: neutral) (146 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
29. Nikisa (Trust: neutral) (216 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
30. jokers10 (Trust: neutral) (333 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

May I know why these users? There's nothing indicating that their judgement should be trusted.

Fair inquiry? No answer since until today where I got:

Two of them haven't been to the forum in a while. All of them are ordinary users of the Russian locale. I don't know them personally but they haven't done anything wrong to anyone. I don't think that my trust list should be based only on judgments about a person or on your opinion. As I said before, I have -retracted- and I just don't understand such manipulations of other people's opinions.

You openly encourage users to add me to their tilde trust lists. I find that unacceptable to the trust system.

Exclusions (81):

Code:

~
~madnessteat
~

I also put you a tilde on my trust list.

I felt it was necessary to warn you.

Exposing this public or showing it to other DT members was claimed to be "proof of my manipulations". Do not PM me anymore.

Local thread rule: Known forum-troll and trust system abuser, TECSHARE, is not allowed to participate.

[1714581570]

1714581570

[1714581570]

1714581570

[1714581570]

1714581570

[1714581570]

1714581570

[1714581570]

1714581570

[madnessteat]

Guys, Lauda is manipulating the trust system. Everybody's known that for a long time. But when I added her tilde, she thought I was manipulating the trust system. Look through the history of my trust lists from the Losev's dumps and you'll see which one of us is right.

[Lauda]

FTFY. Good argument. Move along now if you have nothing proper to say.
Update: Posts will be removed if nothing of substance is said (like one just was).

[madnessteat]

Update: Posts will be removed if nothing of substance is said (like one just was).

If you think that deleting my messages in the topic you have created is the best solution, then I see a problem. I therefore suggest that you create a normal thread or not delete my posts.

Your topic with a cult created a long time ago this is the reason why I turned to you. If you think that you should encourage other users to compile their trust lists based on your recommendations, then you don't understand how the trust system should work.

[Lauda]

Update: Posts will be removed if nothing of substance is said (like one just was).

If you think that deleting my messages in the topic you have created is the best solution, then I see a problem. I therefore suggest that you create a normal thread or not delete my posts.

Your topic with a cult created a long time ago this is the reason why I turned to you. If you think that you should encourage other users to compile their trust lists based on your recommendations, then you don't understand how the trust system should work.

Any other arguments?

[Vod]

Everybody's known that for a long time.

That is not true.  Don't start sounding like Techy, who likes to imagine everyone feels the same as he does.

If Lauda is manipulating the trust system - hes/she is doing a terrible job.  Only one inclusion to DT2.

[madnessteat]

Everybody's known that for a long time.

That is not true.  Don't start sounding like Techy, who likes to imagine everyone feels the same as he does.

If Lauda is manipulating the trust system - hes/she is doing a terrible job.  Only one inclusion to DT2.

Do you think that I abused the system by including her in my trust list with tilde because it publicly encourages users of her cult to act on its behalf?

[Vod]

Do you think that I abused the system by including her in my trust list with tilde because it publicly encourages users of her cult to act on its behalf?

That post will be deleted, as will this one.  :/

Ask a question without insults and wild assumptions, and we can have a discussion.

[madnessteat]

Do you think that I abused the system by including her in my trust list with tilde because it publicly encourages users of her cult to act on its behalf?

That post will be deleted, as will this one.  :/

Ask a question without insults and wild assumptions, and we can have a discussion.

I didn't mean to hurt anyone but I can make some mistakes so English is not my native language. I will go back home and create the thread itself, which will not delete posts. It is very uncomfortable to communicate at work and from a smartphone.

[Vod]

Do you think that I abused the system by including her in my trust list with tilde... ?

No.  Your trust list is yours, as are your reasons for it.

You'll do fine if you stick to facts and leave out the insults and exaggeration.

[madnessteat]

Do you think that I abused the system by including her in my trust list with tilde... ?

No.  Your trust list is yours, as are your reasons for it.

You'll do fine if you stick to facts and leave out the insults and exaggeration.

I do not create my trust list by someone else's request or recommendation, nor do I care what views the person I add has. For me, trust lists and feedback from the person I add are important. I also don't accept manipulation of the trust system.

[The Cryptovator]

Was it really necessary to post private discussions on public? Perhaps I would agree to post publicly if there is something obvious abuse or against forum rules (IMO). I think anyone would ask reason of exclusion politely. It doesn't mean he is trying to manipulate your trust list. Your trust list under your control. However, you already answered him and ignored PM. That should ended there from your end.

@madnessteat, honestly we shouldn't argue if someone exclude us. Nothing wrong to ask, but you know very well what would be answer, it's simple. Shouldn't furthur arguments if someone say, "I don't trust your judgment"

[Lauda]

Was it really necessary to post private discussions on public?

Yes. Any attempts, and I do not care by who, of even remote manipulation, coercion, threats and many other things instantly get posted by me. Aside from myself, the PMs can be read by the administrators, the datacenter technicians, Cloudflare, and the NSA. They are public as is anyways.

However, you already answered him and ignored PM. That should ended there from your end.

I call absolute bullshit. Had I removed him from my list as he initially asked, not only would I not be excluded I would probably be included. This is a scratch my back and I'll scratch yours kind of abuse. Statements such as yours also sadly enable these people: Many examples by others "agree to disagree", "difference in opinion", "ignore it and it will go away".

I have tagged Lauda.
Publication of personal messages without consent. User cannot be trusted

Make sure you do the same for Techy and OGNasty.  

I am waiting. I believe we are way beyond ripe to start multiple flags (flag type-1) against the involved users (many from the Turkish section, a few from the Russian section).

[ChuckBuck]

I also put you a tilde on my trust list.

I felt it was necessary to warn you.

Someone please tell me the meaning of this saying   Is this a threatening way to manipulate trust? Or am I misunderstanding what it means? If you do not remove me from your exclusion list, I will put you on my exclusion list. In this way, it is like an act of retaliation   LOL   I used to send a message to a user asking him why he exclude me, but it just stopped there, there shouldn't be any revenge.
We have the same hats, but we don't have the same thoughts, it's a pity  

[Lauda]

I am dumping the whole PM conversation with madnessteat.

Classy.

This is due to your policy "No public evidence, can not do anything" on one hand, and me not tolerating abuse on the other hand. You reap what you sow. I have even omitted any information that may be harmful to the user and is irrelevant. He/she/it is welcome.

Thule   2020-03-04   Reference   Published PM without consent.
Known scammer and abuser .
I would not trust him a single Cent.
Big part of community got their BCH stolen by him as escrow
peloso   2020-03-04   Reference   Publication of personal messages without consent.
kzv   2020-03-04   Reference   Publication of personal messages without consent. User cannot be trusted
peloso   2020-03-03   Reference   Created a pseudo-religious cult to manipulate default trust list
Balthazar   2020-03-03   Reference   Archive reference for previous feedback
Balthazar   2020-03-03   Reference   Created a pseudo-religious cult to manipulate default trust list. If I remember correctly, this user was claiming that such activities are untrustworthy (see peloso user profile for details).

It also provided you with evidence of this collusion, so have at it.

I also put you a tilde on my trust list.

I felt it was necessary to warn you.

Someone please tell me the meaning of this saying  Is this a threatening way to manipulate trust? Or am I misunderstanding what it means? If you do not remove me from your exclusion list, I will put you on my exclusion list. In this way, it is like an act of retaliation  LOL  I used to send a message to a user asking him why he exclude me, but it just stopped there, there shouldn't be any revenge.
We have the same hats, but we don't have the same thoughts, it's a pity 

I will translate it  (this is what happened):
Step 1: User A: You have me excluded, can you look into it?
Step 2: User B: I will look into it - I have looked into it - Questions some inclusions/exclusions or sent ratings (depending on what is problematic). Keep in mind that this review is solely because User A asked.
Step 3: User A: I have excluded you.

This is what would have happened if I had acted differently:
Step 1: User A: You have me excluded, can you look into it?
Step 2: User B: I have removed your exclusion.
Step 3: User A: Thanks (and possibly "I have included you" - and the cycle begins).

[madnessteat]

I also put you a tilde on my trust list.

I felt it was necessary to warn you.

Someone please tell me the meaning of this saying   Is this a threatening way to manipulate trust? Or am I misunderstanding what it means? If you do not remove me from your exclusion list, I will put you on my exclusion list. In this way, it is like an act of retaliation   LOL   I used to send a message to a user asking him why he exclude me, but it just stopped there, there shouldn't be any revenge.
We have the same hats, but we don't have the same thoughts, it's a pity  

Where did you see any threats or suggestions in my PM?

You should not confuse a threat or suggestion with a fact that an action has already occurred. I didn't offer any deals. And my tilde isn't being held back.

The tilde is for a public attempt to influence user trust lists.

Lauda unable to remember what I got the tilde for, I reminded her in PM. The tilde was added at a time when TMAN created a topic about collusion in the Russian locale to undermine the trust system. Back then, Theymos called him an asshole. This is my only account and I was not involved in any collusion.

@Lauda I came home and we can continue this conversation. You still think I tried to manipulate your trust list or threatened you?

[suchmoon]

This is due to your policy "No public evidence, can not do anything" on one hand, and me not tolerating abuse on the other hand.

Yet it doesn't provide any "evidence" so what was the point? Makes me think that the "secret evidence" in other cases, such as Kalemder's, is similarly flimsy to non-existent.

No, this is not a request to publish any more PMs, and not an excuse to blame others for your lapse in judgement.

I will translate it  (this is what happened):
Step 1: User A: You have me excluded, can you look into it?
Step 2: User B: I will look into it - I have looked into it - Questions some inclusions/exclusions or sent ratings (depending on what is problematic). Keep in mind that this review is solely because User A asked.
Step 3: User A: I have excluded you.

This is what would have happened if I had acted differently:
Step 1: User A: You have me excluded, can you look into it?
Step 2: User B: I have removed your exclusion.
Step 3: User A: Thanks (and possibly "I have included you" - and the cycle begins).

Even assuming that User A did something wrong - which is debatable since it's based mostly on a hypothetical quid pro quo - a reasonable response would be to exclude them (or keep the exclusion as the case may be) and/or block them. Publishing PMs is uncalled for.

[Lauda]

This is due to your policy "No public evidence, can not do anything" on one hand, and me not tolerating abuse on the other hand.

Yet it doesn't provide any "evidence" so what was the point? Makes me think that the "secret evidence" in other cases, such as Kalemder's, is similarly flimsy to non-existent.

No, this is not a request to publish any more PMs, and not an excuse to blame others for your lapse in judgement.

PMs are not private, and therefore I will publish evidence where I seem that it is necessary (unless secrecy is asked). If you want to defend them or claim their innocence, I leave that up to you. Just do not blame me down the road for whatever comes out of not acting in time. Thanks.

Publishing PMs is uncalled for.

I'll follow your exclusion list (among many other individuals) closely relating to these recent events, and let's see if uniformity is going to hold up on what is uncalled for and how it gets handled. I on the other hand strongly disagree, I believe theymos also sides with this view (not related to this particular case). That is, this view:

Publishing a personal message is 100% acceptable. Unless explicitly agreed upon ahead of time, there should not be any expectation of confidentiality when sending a PM. This is regardless of who publishes the message so long as it is being done by someone sending or receiving the message.

[Vod]

This is regardless of who publishes the message so long as it is being done by someone sending or receiving the message.

How would one publish the message without receiving it?   


I can see dumping an entire PM chain to defend oneself - I don't think a person would be guilty of a moral crime.

Consider another example that happened to me - a user took a link I sent him in the middle of a conversation, stripped out all context, made me look like a pervert, then innocently asked "Vod, can you provide us some context? "

Post all of the thread - or at least all of an atomic post - or post nothing.  If you pick and choose words, that should be considered malicious.

So @peloso and @kzv - if you believe Lauda's actions deserve red trust, consider what that user did to me.  :/

Edit... this is a good quote showing malicious intent.

Explain why you sent me the below quote, or admit you enjoy looking at pictures of underage boys you fifty plus year old sick fuck.

[kzv]

I think everyone will be better if posting PMs without permissions will be prohibited by the rules of the forum