Ok, despite i don't ask Veleor about such topic (but i appreciate his attitude to trying to help people), i'm here.
Let's go in order:
If johhnyUA wants that feedback removed, I'm sure he knows that it'll have to be worked out between him and bob123. They're not newbies and they know how things work.
There was a little conversation in PM, which i can't disclose (without bob's agreement) in quotes, but close sense of this conversation was the next: I told him that my quote doesn't mean that i'm doing something against the law and it even doesn't mean that i'm appreciate such behavior. He answered that he doesn't mean anything like that, but he can't trust people with such worldview and he needs to warn another people, and let them decide (for that reason there is sentence "Check context" )
I understood that in PM there will not be any productive conversation, but the things i hate even more than controversial red tags in my profile - is shitting and bitching in Reputation. So i butthurted in our local russian thread for a little bit and give up on it. Life continues, you know.
Above replica is also fit for this quote:
JohhnyUA wanted to create a topic in Reputation as soon as he received a negative trust from Bob123. He said that in the
Russian section, but then for some reason changed his mind. However, I believe that negative feedback is wrong, especially from a DT member, and such reviews undermine the credibility of the entire forum trust system.
IMO we should separate our opinion from facts, even if JohnnyUA "doesn't care about the law" it doesn't mean he is not following them or abide to them also it doesn't mean that he did something illegal. Saying those lines "I don't care about the law" doesn't even incriminate you on any kind of crime it doesn't even get you arrested just by solely saying that so I don't think a negative trust for something you just said in relation to this is worthy of that, only if he said that after he scam someone from Bitcointalk is the only time I would consider a negative tag if I am a DT member.
Exactly. I think the problem in mentality: for Germans (bob123 is from Germany) it's something really terrible to "do not care against the law" at the same time, for many nations living with corrupted governments (like in my country) it's not a question of preferences, it's necessity.
Also, as many of you said above (the same as i said in PM, if IIRC) there too many awful and dangerous laws in our world, which forbid freedom of speech, freedom of trade, freedom to be your own bank and so on.
I can understand why Bob left me this feedback, but i can't accept it (in meaning of acceptance, not like i'm still butthurting about that)
The same answer to
CoolcryptovatorI think this is caused by difficulties in translating from Russian to English and taken out of context.
For honest - no. I was pretty clear and i know English at least enough to translate my thoughts correctly to what i mean (most of the time, and this is such case).
There is
morality in this world, and
laws. Morality is common to all nations, such things like "do not kill, do not steal, do not lie" crossing to many cultures in different times.
Laws is synthetic terms which directly correspond to country which created them. Most of first laws crossed with morality (like laws which forbid stealing) but times passes and there is many laws which at least controversial,
but some times they're oppose morality.
And my replica was a statement that i don't accept raw arguments like "it's against the law". Maybe expressed in some rude form.
IIRC KTChampions exposed JohhnyUA's sockpuppet and got hit with a retaliatory red trust. Two wrongs don't make it right and all that shit (and I think bob123 should revise that negative rating, and KTChampions' second rating is probably unnecessary) but JohhnyUA is abusing the trust system himself in that case.
At first, i wanted to ignore this (about my second feedback) (for example in Dave's replic) but after your "IIRC" i must to answer
No, your memory is playing bad jokes with you. Let me clarify it to you: He used very controversial situation (the argument that i was tagged
only by him, noone else tagged me. I will tell you a little more, at first bob123 tagged me about "cheating" but after strong proofs the removed his tag) to sort out with his opponent. Just like personal vendetta.
My feedback is about that this person is a liar, who accused people (not me, important moment) in strong sins without any proofs (just his "view"). So i think, that with such people, who can accuse you in stealing, "corruption" and so on, red trust feedback fit pretty well.
The only difference between me and Lauda is that Lauda tagged by himself people which accused him in "stealing/corruption/so on" while i tagged someone who accused third party.
Do not thank for clarification.
P.S: But again, it's like one year passed i don't want to create another drama. If bob will see it and decide to leave his feedback as it is, when this is his decision and i fine with this. He is at least not a last member in this community and his feedback is in fact do not affect too much.
