🔥🔥🔥 How Nepotist Corruption Ruined Bitcointalk 🔥🔥🔥

[gumusi]

Q for Bitcointalk community and admin:

Do you ever notice that employees like LoyceV, suchmoon and friends who practically live on the forum don't even once question how a tremendously flawed member with no perceivable qualifications like ~jollygood (aka their obedient hitman) ended up deeply entrenched on DT1 ?

The same usual suspects have a hair sensitive trigger against independent members who don't acquiesce to their nepotist plundering of forum resources and campaign for the community to exclude them in miliseconds the moment a disagreement arises...

#DoubleStandards #Hypocrisy #Nepotism.ruined.Bitcointalk

[1715694785]

1715694785

[1715694785]

1715694785

[1715694785]

1715694785

[suchmoon]

1) You're evading a ban.
2) I'm not an employee of Bitcointalk.
3) JollyGood is not my hitman. I don't suppose you got any proof of that or anything else in your post?

[LoyceV]

4) We are not friends :P
5) I don't live here.
6) Who are you? And why are you suddenly so concerned with me, right after JollyGood gave you negative feedback?
7) I don't have access to forum resources.
8) I have only excluded a few users, and I use that very carefully.

[gumusi]

Counter Questions:

1) Aren't you guys, as arguably the most active members of Bitcointalk, the least bit concerned that provably bad actors and totally unethical abusers like jollygood and lauda are now part of your beloved Default Trust network ?

2) Why do you always play blind, deaf and mute, when hitmen emerge to defame independent and talented members in this forum, is it to protect your Chipmixer and avatar Salaries and various other benefits ?

3) Don't you realize this corrupt and nepotistic behavior has turned this forum into a ghost town, with only a handful people other than the Chipmixer cult remaining...
Please don't derail this thread with bullshit, it will be promptly deleted, and directly address the questions raised to you.

Thanks

[DireWolfM14]

Why is JollyGood's behavior the responsibility of these two members?  How about you discuss your disagreement with JollyGood, and stop trolling members who have nothing to do with it.  I have an idea, instead of trying to spread blame for your red-tag, you should take responsibility and accountability for your own actions...  Novel idea, I know.

Not only are neither LoyceV nor suchmoon responsible for JollyGood's position on DT1, one of them is voting against him, and has been for weeks.

Trust list for: suchmoon (Trust: +14 / =2 / -0) (DT1! (37) 4154 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2020-05-23_Sat_05.03h)

suchmoon Distrusts these users' judgement:
124. NEW ~JollyGood (Trust: +10 / =0 / -2) (DT1! (6) 627 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.

[suchmoon]

Counter Questions:

1) Aren't you guys, as arguably the most active members of Bitcointalk, the least bit concerned that provably bad actors and totally unethical abusers like jollygood and lauda are now part of your beloved Default Trust network ?

2) Why do you always play blind, deaf and mute, when hitmen emerge to defame independent and talented members in this forum, is it to protect your Chipmixer and avatar Salaries and various other benefits ?

3) Don't you realize this corrupt and nepotistic behavior has turned this forum into a ghost town, with only a handful people other than the Chipmixer cult remaining...
Please don't derail this thread with bullshit, it will be promptly deleted, and directly address the questions raised to you.

Thanks

Those aren't really questions, just some fallacies with question marks at the end. I have to note that I exclude both JollyGood and Lauda but that has nothing to do with avatars or Chipmixer or whatever, nor should it. So you're gonna have to find something else to blame me for.

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.

Aha! LoyceV's fault obviously.

[dragonvslinux]

This clearly has nothing to do with LoyceV nor suchmoon, just going for a couple of the strongest DT members I guess, but that's probably obvious to most.

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

Your reference links:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200529232531/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225711.msg53851746#msg53851746
https://web.archive.org/web/20200706153350/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225711.msg53865312

Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260202.msg54742809#msg54742809


The user in question was in fact tagged with this reference link however:
https://web.archive.org/save/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg53348632#msg53348632

The stupid thing is they weren't correctly tagged for having an alt account & cheating on bounty (as a DT member already did) but instead with:

BEWARE: gumusi has been connected a group of trolls from the Turkish board that are spreading propaganda and part of a merit abuse and fake trust circle and he seems to promote low-life users such as Vispilio.

@JollyGood: Just red tag account for the right reason surely? Otherwise the feedback reads like a conspiracy with no reference to back such a claim.
More than anything, seems like a lazy copy & paste job. I hope this referencing issue won't be ignored just because the user is discredited.
PS - I think you did well to amend your previous feedback to neutral, but at the same time you failed to review identical negative feedback.

[LoyceV]

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

From that topic:

I am a very approachable person, if someone wants to send a PM and ask me to reconsider or would like me explain various things to me in order to change feedback to include/exclude on my Trust list I am very happy to engage with users. The OP should have sent me a PM

Have you tried that gumusi?

[dragonvslinux]

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

From that topic:

I am a very approachable person, if someone wants to send a PM and ask me to reconsider or would like me explain various things to me in order to change feedback to include/exclude on my Trust list I am very happy to engage with users. The OP should have sent me a PM

Have you tried that gumusi?

I know someone else already did yesterday (via pm), but the previously referenced feedback (plural) remains the same. Also from that thread:

Thank you for your comments TalkStar. I revised the feedback simply because LoyceV posted here and because a highly respected member sent a PM asking me to reconsider, I could not say "no" either of them as I have a very high regard and respect for them.

Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5260202.msg54744124#msg54744124

Maybe a strong DT member highly respected member could give it another go?

[hacker1001101001]

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

From that topic:

I am a very approachable person, if someone wants to send a PM and ask me to reconsider or would like me explain various things to me in order to change feedback to include/exclude on my Trust list I am very happy to engage with users. The OP should have sent me a PM

Have you tried that gumusi?

Ok, so it's expectable for DT1's to slap agendic and illogical feedbacks on users trust wall and demand for an PM to remove it or get it changed to neutral or beg to the DT (who you feel is racist) for reconsideng the feedback. This should go in some DT guide, I guess.

OP, is not obligate to send PM, I already had bad experiences with many DTs in PM on such feedback cases, it's doesn't turn right.

[Josefjix]

Op what's the reason for your Red trust?
LoyceV has nothing to do with this if you're very observant of this particular case.

[dragonvslinux]

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

From that topic:

I am a very approachable person, if someone wants to send a PM and ask me to reconsider or would like me explain various things to me in order to change feedback to include/exclude on my Trust list I am very happy to engage with users. The OP should have sent me a PM

Have you tried that gumusi?

Ok, so it's expectable for DT1's to slap agendic and illogical feedbacks on users trust wall and demand for an PM to remove it or get it changed to neutral or beg to the DT (who you feel is racist) for reconsideng the feedback. This should go in some DT guide, I guess.

Calm down hacker, there were no demands or begging suggested. I do see your point though, if you feel someone is being racist, they aren't approachable by default (whether they are racist or not is completely irrelevant). To me it seems like a clear cut case of revising feedback based on being given a push to do so, more or less following suggestions from those you consider more powerful than yourself, as opposed to any form of self-reflection. It comes across as self-preservation more than anything else. Disappointing to the say the least  

Op what's the reason for your Red trust?

This.

[trendcoin]

This would be related to this unresolved situation: Re: To all DT1 members | Interesting negative feedback from JollyGood!

From that topic:

I am a very approachable person, if someone wants to send a PM and ask me to reconsider or would like me explain various things to me in order to change feedback to include/exclude on my Trust list I am very happy to engage with users. The OP should have sent me a PM

Have you tried that gumusi?

Ok, so it's expectable for DT1's to slap agendic and illogical feedbacks on users trust wall and demand for an PM to remove it or get it changed to neutral or beg to the DT (who you feel is racist) for reconsideng the feedback. This should go in some DT guide, I guess.

OP, is not obligate to send PM, I already had bad experiences with many DTs in PM on such feedback cases, it's doesn't turn right.

even if some groundless claims fail, they form a bad place in the memory of society (this creates some kind of perception). Clear and groundless claims made on people must be explicitly rejected. Thus, a good position can be achieved in the perception of society.

If dt1 members know that their claims are blank, they should first ask the matter from the private message and wait for an answer about it. if their claims are weak, they should not give negative feedback.

they can make bad impressions about people when they make mistakes by acting hastily.

[Vispilio]

Excellent thread by @gumusi.

Here he is employing a technique known to ardent students of logic as "Modus Tollendo Ponens" or disjunctive syllogism, which I noted with some surprise that even many of the local users he is defending seem to have missed  ...

It goes like this, 1 of the following statements must be true:

Either i) the Default Trust System is working as intended and bad actors and abusers are eliminated by the collective conscience of DT1 and BTT community
or ii) the DT system is in ruins, and therefore this forum in its current format is considerably broken.

He then goes on to say, since the DT1 and the larger BTT community are mostly silent on the ongoing libel and black propaganda by crooked ninjas like ~jollygood and ~lauda that they end up getting represented on the DT system month after month,

the inevitable conclusion must be that the Default Trust system is a joke and serves mainly to smear strong and independent opponents for political reasons and has subtracted greatly from the prestige and brand value of Bitcointalk.

Instead of wasting time on extremely minor details and personal scuffles, please try to address the arguments from the overarching theme mentioned in the OP.

All the Best

[dragonvslinux]

For the sake clarity, I modified the negative trust to make it more relevant and decided to keep it red until or unless I see behaviour from the OP that makes me revise it to neutral.

I'm glad you've corrected the accuracy of your feedback. What about the others though that I referenced above as well as PM'd you about?



Source: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1016855

References:
1. https://web.archive.org/web/20200529232531/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225711.msg53851746#msg53851746
2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5252627.0
3. https://web.archive.org/save/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225711.msg53865312#msg53865312
4. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5252627.0

In references 1&3, there are no references to "merit abuse and fake trust circle" in the referenced posts that endorses Vispilio's campaign services.
In references 2&4, there are no mention of promoting Vispilio in the referenced post. What does Vispilio have to do with these users?

Ultimately it's up to you how you leave your feedback, but referencing your allegations is always a good start, as it's strengthens your feedback.
Surely there isn't the need for another 4 topics to clear this up. You're 33% there now, you're doing great.

[gumusi]

At this point it would be fair to conclude that Bitcointalk should be boycotted and avoided as a broken forum until such time that all the Negative Trust spammers are blacklisted from ALL layers of DT.

It's not rocket science guys, if someone is spamming nonsensical ratings simply to vent their toxic hatred like trolls jollygood and lauda here, you need a mechanism in place so that they don't prevent healthy traffic and engagement, if you have any desire to maintain a functional forum...

[actmyname]

you need a mechanism in place so that they don't prevent healthy traffic and engagement, if you have any desire to maintain a functional forum...

I love this functional forum where we care about preventing long-term scammers from preying on Newbies. I love this forum where we don't have a dedicated board for ponzi schemes and HYIP frauds. I love this forum where we're running on a modern forum board, where we don't have another forum project that has been in development for years. It's great seeing such a strong community: one where the metrics required to join the DefaultTrust network aren't arbitrary and where someone could never possibly get onto DT1 without having been a trustworthy individual.

[marlboroza]

Stop shitposting, Vispilio...

[Vispilio]

Stop shitposting, Vispilio...

great inference, now everyone who sees through childish nepotist games must be Vispilio or close friend of Vispilio, excellent job 🍀

[marlboroza]

Stop shitposting, Vispilio...

great inference, now everyone who sees through childish nepotist games must be Vispilio or close friend of Vispilio, excellent job 🍀

I have read my post few times and I am sure I said "stop shitposting, Vispilio".

You agreed to something which is not true (read posts #2 and #3), you said it is excellent thread and then you made your regular political shitpost. You don't even want to read anything and look into facts.