The corruption here is just way to obvious. What's more concerning is ...

[Laudanum]

I mean it is clearly obvious that when DT and mods and admin reject the notion of transparet objective standards then there is corruption. There can be no other reason? Else why not support a system that ensures each member is treated fairly and equally and that free-speech is protected?

I mean it had been suggested by many others long before but when a group of members suggested there should be clear transparent objective standards for leaving red tags or even abolish that subjective dangerous crap altogether and rely solely on flags 2 and 3 with flag1 having to meet the " attempting to scam, strongly appearing to set up a scam or undeniable financially motivated wrongdoing "

Then when DT opposed it and there was no support from mods or admin then of course there could only be 1 reason. Some are corrupt or all are corrupt.

To make everything transparent and objective would remove the subjective cesspit from which all the abuse, gaming and self serving advantage that DT awards itself. It also removes the crushing influence over free speech.

So let me ask any member here again.

Give me a compelling argument not to introduce the transparent objective standards for trust feedback.

All you need to do is present a compelling argument that favors keeping it is now over moving to the transparent objective standards system many have called for time and time again.

Why should you fight to keep the power to use the trust system as a subjective corrupt  tool for personal gain? Why should you fight to retain the ability to block legitmate scam warnings?

Why has theymos sat back and observed the merit cycling self elected DT take all the prime sig spots and abuse the accounts of any that presented independently verifiable evidence of their prior scamming or drawn attention to their obvious gaming of his diabolical designs. ? It impossible to be oblivious surely? That's simply not an option now. There must be another explanation. I had assumed it must be some honeypot. Then I saw the sorrowful goodbye to a proven scammer, deliberate sneaky plagiarist, extortionist,  trust abuser, shady escrow aka a tiny bit of suboptimal behavior here and there.  I started to realize this was kind of strange.

So let's hear it why is the forum left in this state for over a year now?

The flagging system just made matter worse. I mean clearly most ignored theymos direction that red tags were for scammers or those attempting to scam or set up a scam anyway but now he says red tags for drinking lemon tea is okay , as is a type 1 flag.  Then what point was the flagging system introduced? It has no purpose? Except make it even easier for DT1 turds to ruin your account on whim ?

The corrupt sig managers will say oh you have a red tag cant be on our campaign unless you are DT with a red tag then that's okay lol
So the main punishment for most people is the same for a red tag or type 3 flag.

So what possible reason could there be to leave the forum in this state for this long ?

Now before you all start predictably posting little pictures saying dont feed the troll with zero evidence of trolling but allowed to do so by the corrupted mods who mark reporting that as bad  even though it is spamming, probably false ( so trolling) and off topic and irrelevant

Why not give me your best argument not to adopt transparent objective standards for leaving negative trust?

Well we know why... because you dont have any arguments that will stand up to scrutiny and want to retain your subjective advantage to game the system so you get to keep spamming chipmixer and you paid avatars even though none of you have achieved anything or can produce any original thought inspiring posts that made any lasting difference here.

But I digress. Produce you best argument. I will debunk and crush it  

[suchmoon]

[Laudanum]

Their she is.... I knew I could count on fatty's support and a swift confirmation of everything I stated in the op.

Running away now to spam her chipmixer sig and foxy avatar.
One of the pigs who's nose never leaves the trough obviously.

Would even dare attempt to form a credible argument after being crushed previously each and everytime it opens its dumb mouth.
Who's next?

[PrimeNumber7]

I think this goes up to Satohshi's boss, or possibly even higher.

[Laudanum]

I think this goes up to Satohshi's boss, or possibly even higher.

Ah Quicksellout7 you disgusting slimy weasel
Present your argument or slime back under your rock you pathetic piece of cowardly sig spamming shite.

The system ensured you were punked out in public by a proven scammer. You were forced by the lack of objective standards on to your knees by a scammer and wash his balls with your forked tongue to retain your paid2post for crumbs capacity.

Anyone deleting valid warnings on multiple proven scammers to gain some btc dust is certainly a Prime example of why the system needs objective standards to protect truly honest members.

Thanks for allowing me to use you as a perfect example of the damage such a subjective clusterfuck mess result in.
Now here sliming around DT1 members trying to get back onside. You would make a great addition

What a pathetic sad loser. Been here years still no bitcoin still being forced to eat scammer ass in public for dust.

Now that quicksellout7 has provide perhaps the most damning example of what leverage subjectivity in the trust system can force members to do.. who will dare provide a counter argument to support poor cowardly wretches like Quicksellout being forced to eat the same scammers ass hes been claiming is the very most dangerous member here for years just because that same scammer slapped red rags on his new shiny sig spamming account hes been growing for a while?

I mean if the DT system can force elder members after years of warning about the dangers of certain scammers to become their bitch to slap around with warnings like " you're starting to sound a lot like quickseller again" if they dare say a word against them then what hope for free speech from other members? I mean obviously most will have a backbone unlike quickseller the self escrowing scammer and account seller broke down cowardly bum. Still the pressure there is clear and dangerous.

Still why not adopt transparent objective standards? Poor old cody and cowards like him have suffered enough? Why keep making him apologize and beg for forgiveness whilst sliming around on PN7?

Its nauseating to watch him have to keep debasing himself , saying how sorry he isn't really just all the time driven on in a frenzy for more crumbs as bitcoin climbs ever higher, all the while having to refuse to answer straight questions until some tag him again? Cant someone just give him a few satoshi?  Poor wretch. Pity is the only thing that stops me dedicating a lot of time and effort to sponsors that use proven scammers and those willing to work with other scammers for a price.

Now where is that argument for retaining the subjective mess that allows bitching out quicksellers ass on a whim by superior level scammer.

Quicksellout7 wouldn't it be great for you to present an argument to support the very treatment that forced you to eat scammer ass in public. Go ahead provide the ultimate entertainment for me.  Argue for your own public abuse to be legitmate and optimal you could even earn another 5 bucks in dust for doing so.

Don't run away. I am looking forward to digging deeply into this with you.

Wow 37.5k? Let me just flip another small handful of bitcoins into fiat today.  What would you buy with it ... I mean in a fantasy like situation? A backbone?  SV or SVJ is the question. One is slightly faster the other slightly more rare and I feel better looking.  

[arbiter5]

If you don't like how things are done here, then simply hop onto a different community or create your own forum. Pretty simple. You seem to be overly riled up over an internet forum.

[Laudanum]

If you don't like how things are done here, then simply hop onto a different community or create your own forum. Pretty simple. You seem to be overly riled up over an internet forum.

Why didn't I think of that before?

Do you like how things are done?

You are against the introduction of transparent objective standards that ensure a fair and level playing field for all.
That is what you want to say?

Or just here to eat some corrupt DT ass for a merit morsel?

What makes you feel I'm riled up?
Anyone holding bitcoin recently isn't going to get to riled up over the fact bct is broken now.
I'm just trying to give back to the community.

Create a fair and transparent system and watch the forum take off again.

But you dont want that you say?

What about poor quicksellout7 ? You dont care how they've broken him for some dust?
That's a very selfish attitude you have there.
Why be this way?

I only use harsh terms to help snap people out of their delusions and hopefully set them back upon the correct path again.
Yous simply cant sell yourself into subservience to scammers and greedy scum for dust and expect others not to notice that you're a prime example of everything wrong with the subjective gamed and broken mess of merit and DT.


As always I am here to help others. For myself I require nothing.

[arbiter5]

Why didn't I think of that before?

Do you like how things are done?

You are against the introduction of transparent objective standards that ensure a fair and level playing field for all.
That is what you want to say?

Or just here to eat some corrupt DT ass for a merit morsel?

I'm here to talk Bitcoin. Couldn't care less of the politics of this forum, really.

What makes you feel I'm riled up?

Take a look at your past replies in this thread. You sound like an insulted flat-earther.

What about poor quicksellout7 ? You dont care how they've broken him for some dust?
That's a very selfish attitude you have there.
Why be this way?

I don't even know the person, and I really don't care who he or she is.

I only use harsh terms to help snap people out of their delusions and hopefully set them back upon the correct path again.
Yous simply cant sell yourself into subservience to scammers and greedy scum for dust and expect others not to notice that you're a prime example of everything wrong with the subjective gamed and broken mess of merit and DT.


As always I am here to help others. For myself I require nothing.

Whatever.

[Laudanum]

As I said, a very selfish attitude.
I was hoping to recruit you to help return this forum to former greatness.
I am now going to have to forget about that I can see.

Mind you, you do respond very quickly. I like that.

Please add me to your watch list. I still feel you have potential.

Let me know if you change your mind. It feels great to help others.
Also don't hold back merit for valuable posts you see here or in my post history.

[cabalism13]

TLDR;
Can't you even express your thoughts in just a few words?
Why do guys like you think that having an extremely long post will give you something positive? Do you guys really think that you look genius or something with this long posts?
And so, may I ask again your point without reading this whole, whatever it is?
Edit: I really thought there's  something interesting  on this but too bad there wasn't...

[The Sceptical Chymist]

transparet objective standards
<snip>
clear transparent objective standards
<snip>
transparent and objective
<snip>
transparent objective standards for trust feedback.
<snip>
transparent objective standards system
<snip>
independently verifiable evidence
<snip>
transparent objective standards for leaving negative trust?

Hmmm.  There's another member who's well-known for writing the above kind of rhetoric, though he seems to have been absent for a month or maybe even longer.  Someone please refresh my memory as to who that is.  I know someone here has got to know who I'm talking about.  Anyone?

The flagging system just made matter worse.

I don't know if it made anything worse, but it did make things more convoluted IMO.  When you've got trust inclusion/exclusions; three tiers of trust scores you can leave for other members (neutral/positive/negative); and a flag system on top of that, it gets quite confusing--especially to those who might be new and unfamiliar with the trust system.

And am I led to believe that this thread is really about Chipmixer jealousy?  OP mentioned "merit cycling" and despite Foxpup's team's name, nobody in it is cycling merits among its members or abusing the merit system (that I know of).  Hell, take a look at the merits I've sent and ask yourself if I'm favoring anyone in particular.

[PrimeNumber7]

I will be completely honest with you. I think you should drop it. Don’t discuss concerns with the trust system.

The trust system is not perfect. There is room for improvement. It is what we have now, and is probably as good as it is going to get.

You are not going to change anyone’s mind.

[Laudanum]

I will be completely honest with you. I think you should drop it. Don’t discuss concerns with the trust system.

The trust system is not perfect. There is room for improvement. It is what we have now, and is probably as good as it is going to get.

You are not going to change anyone’s mind.

I almost stopped reading at being completely honest. ...

You were bullied into cutting a deal with confirmed scammers and people for years you had been certain were financially dangerous.
You were bullied as result of the subjectivity you now say should remain.

Change peoples mind about what?  
I mean seriously you don't feel that those rigging the broken system for their own financial gain are going to suddenly support the transparent objective standards that would take away their grossly unfair advantage?
I'm clearly not aiming for that.

I don't need to change anyone's mind on that is it is clearly broken and unfair and crushes free speech.
They know this is the case. It has been undeniably proven.

They can produce no argument that stands up to scrutiny for retaining this broken subjective mess.
There are zero advantages.
There are numerous undeniable advantages for the entire forum to adopting a fully transparent and objective basis for the trust system.

As I say produce a credible argument to retain this mess?
You of all people should appreciate that it crushes free speech and also acts as protection racket ranging from preventing warnings on proven scammers, red tag removal trading. Punishing whistleblowers, incentives to abuse the trust system and protect shady sponsors.
That's without the clear and undeniable ability to dominate all the most lucrative spots and milk the forum dry.

The largest concern is the impact upon free speech.

I mean are you quickseller? You dare not even answer that?

I mean if I was lauda I would just say to you now " hmmm you're starting to sound like quickseller " and you'd be saying how sorry you were.

Would you support the adoption of a transparent objective set of standards for the trust system ?
Yes or No?


Change peoples mind on what?

Why is it as good as it is going to get? What do you mean?
A/ theymos deliberately created a system to crush free speech and allow a tiny minority to milk the forum and scam with impunity
B / theymos didnt mean to but it's the best he can do
C/ you explain?


@pharmacist

Your post doesnt address the core points which are the undeniable advantages of moving to the transparent objective set of standards as a basis for the trust system

It is merely speculative on the author and motive
Both of which you may not understand are entirely irrelevant.
I'm not sure if you can be schooled to output any value but stick around here and ask on topic and relevant questions and I shall assist you as best as I can.

The advantages exist or they do not.

Do you support transparent objective standards that ensure the fair and equal treatment of all members ?

@canabal13

Your post is void of any identifiable intelligence. I think that is bot spew.

[marlboroza]

why
Why
Why

Why
why
Why

Well we know why...

As you asked and answered your own questions, you can lock this topic.

[Insanerman]

I don't know if it made anything worse, but it did make things more convoluted IMO.  When you've got trust inclusion/exclusions; three tiers of trust scores you can leave for other members (neutral/positive/negative); and a flag system on top of that, it gets quite confusing--especially to those who might be new and unfamiliar with the trust system.

And am I led to believe that this thread is really about Chipmixer jealousy?  OP mentioned "merit cycling" and despite Foxpup's team's name, nobody in it is cycling merits among its members or abusing the merit system (that I know of).  Hell, take a look at the merits I've sent and ask yourself if I'm favoring anyone in particular.

LOL. The OP is really obnoxious to be so fluent in various rhetorical terms yet points his fingers onto various things that would satisfy his unending insecurity to points that were irrelevant to a certain matter that supposed to be directly explained right away.

I'm an anti-politics myself yet I've never experience being opposed nor oppressed by certain group of people in here, nor by anyone. It all lies back to one question, what makes you create an account in this forum? For me, I've start to learn and to share knowledge about crypto, as it was supposed to be -- nothing more, nothing less. So what's the point of arguing the trust system when in fact you can just be a normal user in here whom is here for pure knowledge gathering and sharing? Yes, people can abuse the trust system, but it can be fixed with in a nice and polite way. Being aggressive to be heard out only makes a person desperate for both attention and power, power to take revenge and not to fix things.

Now, I know you'll point any flaws you can find in my recent posts and activities, or I post this because of the payment. Too cliche..

[Lafu]

Ah Cryptohunter is awake at least !
Thought you maybe come up with some better Story in the new year but you failed with that.
I would be surprised if there was coming something diffrent that we havnt heard from you complaining , as always the same shit over and over!
Back on ignore again .

[Laudanum]

Here we have Insanerman adopting the " if I say it's too cliche to notice I'm claiming to only be here to ask question and learn whilst spamming a sig and avatar for the max rates I can milk, then he can't  actually mention it " approach.

No, you're simply here to make money. I tell you what m, you request now a mod sig bans you for life and insist upon it.
Then I could take you a little bit more seriously.
The anecdotal I've managed to kiss ass and slime on to meta to get some merits and get to spam for dust so I believe this system works great is laughable.

How about you field a credible argument to retain it over a transparent objective standards based system where we make an in depth comparison.

Are you up for that? Yes or No.

I've seen nobody even dare attempt to enter a public debate here yet.
Why? Because it is clear there is no good reason to stick with a subjective system with multiple undeniable dangerous disadvantages that would be eradicated under a transparent objective standards based system.

You know these bumps, desperate attempts to derail with speculative irrelevant garbage and unbridled cryptohunter obsession makes me horny.
So let's get down to business

I mean there is no other reason for rejecting a transparent objective standards based system unless you fear a fair, honest and open playing field for all members and want to abuse the subjective mess we have.

There is no other reason? Hence why nobody in meta wants to compete fairly with other members. The subjectivity is the real tool of control they want to retain above all others.

Give me one other credible reason that I cant destroy with ease.
Come on hurry up I do have other things to do.

Anyone game? Or just gonna keep running away from the core points ?

Why do you want to retain the subjectivity you frequently abuse?
Just money or some other reason?