[great drama] Timelord2067's "homophobic" Trust abuse on hilariousandco/etc

[LoyceV]

On 2020-08-26, Timelord2067 gave hilariousandco, hilariousetc and hilarious* this negative feedback (Reference link):

This user is engaging in homophobic hate speech against the wider LGBTIQQ community as evidenced in the referenced "satirical" thread. https://archive.vn/vgDQz

I now know why alts hilariousandco u=164822 / hilariousetc u=397737 / hilarious* u=1424594 are Trolling me with their constant threatening behavior.

Just recently, Timelord2067 reached DefaultTrust (again).

I think this is Trust abuse:

Negative (shown as -1)

• If you believe someone is a scammer, or someone is likely to scam, that deserves negative feedback. Please provide evidence.
• If you really hate someone and he's a terrible troll, that does not deserve negative feedback.

"The forum" shows this is Trust abuse as it has nothing to do with trade risks:


Theymos thinks this is Trust abuse:

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.

Negative feedback isn't your diary.

Now why this topic, I hear you ask? And why not just add Timelord2067 to my list of Trust exclusions? Because I like some/many of the feedbacks he sent! If only he'd omit the diary part, the remainder could be useful.
It also helps I'm currently not on DT1, and Timelord2067's DT2-strength is (1). That means he'll need 2 Trust exclusions to be removed from DT2. I'll exclude him if this feedback is still negative by the time I win the DT1 lottery again.

My earlier more subtle attempts didn't help:

I'm surprised Timelord2067 is on DT again. That's a good moment to clean up bad ratings made in the past, and this is one of them.

@Timelord2067: what's with the trust abuse on hilariousandalt?

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.

It's ironic Timelord2067 accuses hilariousetc of Trust abuse.

[PrimeNumber7]

This is about something that happened nearly two years ago.

Pro-tip -- don't go digging about things that have happened years ago, and attempt to litigate them today. By now, many people have seen the ratings in question and have had the opportunity to react appropriately.

[LoyceV]

This is about something that happened nearly two years ago.

Timelord2067 didn't reach DT until recently.

Pro-tip -- don't go digging about things that have happened years ago, and attempt to litigate them today. By now, many people have seen the ratings in question and have had the opportunity to react appropriately.

So you're saying I should just exclude him? I was trying to not need that.

[hilariousetc]

Timelord has a very weird definition of what trust abuse is and it often changes to suit his own narrative. It is trust abuse and he should have removed it years ago.

Timelord's petty vendetta against me goes back years and all started in the first place because I excluded him from my trust-list because of his often wildly inaccurate feedbacks he left on dozens of instances and as we can see that still continues to this day, but that's the best excuse he could come up with to leave negative feedback on me after extensively combing through my posts to try find something to justify his feedback system abuse after he became butthurt after another spat we had.

His trust on me is also literally inaccurate because my comments were not homophobic. If anything you could maybe argue they were transphobic or whatever non-binary-phobic is, but it's neither of them because it was what is called a joke.

I would encourage everyone to distrust ~Timelord2067 until he sorts his hypocritical abusive trust out.

This is about something that happened nearly two years ago.

Pro-tip -- don't go digging about things that have happened years ago, and attempt to litigate them today. By now, many people have seen the ratings in question and have had the opportunity to react appropriately.

Pro-tip: Timelord left that feedback two years ago on a post that was almost two years older than that so he had to do a lot of digging to find it. Maybe timelord should take heed instead of being a further hypocrite.

[Foxpup]

So you're saying I should just exclude him? I was trying to not need that.

Why not? DT is full of trust-abusing trolls, and Timelord2067 is one of the most notorious. That's why I excluded him, after all.

Though at the risk of inciting additional drama, I am forced to admit that he is right in this particular case (something about stopped clocks). I don't trust transphobes either, which is why I excluded hilariousandco and their alts.

His trust on me is also literally inaccurate because my comments were not homophobic.

Technically true, but it's an understandable mistake; most transphobia is just recycled homophobia, after all. Who do you think you're fooling?

[Poker Player]

From what he says here?

https://archive.ph/vgDQz

I didn't know that but it is along the lines of what I wrote more recently.
    
Fluid gender garbage.

Though at the risk of inciting additional drama, I am forced to admit that he is right in this particular case (something about stopped clocks). I don't trust transphobes either, which is why I excluded hilariousandco and their alts.

There is nothing transphobic about highlighting that the theory of the many genders you can constantly change is pure ideological garbage that does not hold up with a minimum of scientific rigor.

And by the way, if what hilarious says is worthy of negative feedback or trust list exclusion, this should be too, because it goes along the same lines:

Unfortunately, I think that you misunderstand the system. Given the trillions of different gender identities, we have adopted a coding system in which each gender identity is assigned a 64-bit number. For example, and only for illustration (I do not wish to presume your wingspan), Apache-attack-helicopter-gendered people would need to input the easy-to-remember code 0x9b68d151aeefa34f. In order to maintain compatibility with legacy systems, however, this is done by submitting the form multiple times with different genders. For example, in this case you would input Male Female Female Male Male Female Male Male Female Male Male Female Male Female Female Female Male Male Female Male Female Female Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Female Female Male Male Female Male Female Male Male Male Female Male Male Male Female Male Male Male Male Male Female Male Female Female Female Male Male Female Male Female Female Male Male Male Male. Simple! Now, it may seem discriminatory to assign Male 1 and Female 0, but not to worry! The coding is designed so that you can also input the inverse and get the same result. And to avoid left-handed bias, you can also enter it in opposite order. In fact, you can just put in whatever sequence of entries you want and the result will be the same.

So you see, bitcointalk.org is in fact the most progressive website ever, and I am ashamed to live in a world in which this system isn't yet codified into law.

[notblox1]

If hilariousetc is homophobic or transphobic, than maybe Timelord2067 is heterophobic and revenge driven, but all that is not the reason to give anyone red trust, unless you can't handle it and you care very much about opinion of other people.
Do whatever you want and believe whatever you want in your personal life, but don't use forum trust for this purpose.
Two days before he wrote that feedback, he called hilariousetc a cry baby, maybe this is where it all started, or maybe even earlier related with Quickseller.

Timelord2067

2020-08-24

What a cry baby hilariousetc is. I leave *neutral* trust feedback on his page, he gives me negative trust feedback... https://i.imgur.com/N9IvXmk.jpg - Definitely trust abuse by hilariousetc

[DaveF]

Sigh...Although not related at all to Timelord2067 / hilariousetc anyone here this is something I posted 3 years ago:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5154576

The trust / feedback section is a flaming pile of dog poo at the moment.
I don't care if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever. I care that if I send them BTC I get what I was supposed to get or if I send him something I get my BTC.
THAT IS TRUST.
Now if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever I might not want to deal with them because I disagree with their beliefs. THAT IS FEEDBACK.

Sadly here, no matter how many times it's discussed it's combined into one thing so we have the "leave a neutral" which and lets be honest here. Just about nobody reads.
FOLLOWED by, since it's not visible on many boards, we may or may not ever see it.

If you spent 100% of your time on the main bitcoin discussion and tech boards you would never know the trust system was there since it's not shown.
Does it matter. Yes, I think it should be everywhere. But once again, that's me and as a realist it's not going to change.

-Dave

[Poker Player]

I generally agree with you, but not with this:

Now if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever I might not want to deal with them because I disagree with their beliefs. THAT IS FEEDBACK.

The big lie that Hilarious is supposedly somethingphobe based on that post should not be reflected in a feedback. Unless you mean neutral feedback, with where almost anything fits.

I don't know if it was a confusion of terms or something.

[DireWolfM14]

I don't care if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever. I care that if I send them BTC I get what I was supposed to get or if I send him something I get my BTC.
THAT IS TRUST.
Now if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever I might not want to deal with them because I disagree with their beliefs. THAT IS FEEDBACK.

I think one of the reasons that there can be different ideas about how to use it.  The example you give here is not how I use the system (now,) and I tend to disagree with your approach.  It's my opinion that if I risk something in a trade, and the other member honors his obligation, that should result in a positive review for that member.  If the other person risks everything, and I honor my end of the agreement I still couldn't possibly know if I can trust the other individual if the rolls were reversed, so I don't leave a positive review.

On the other hand, if you demonstrate proper use of the trust system, leave accurate, documented reviews, have shown good judgement in selecting your "trusted" inclusions and exclusions then I'm likely to add you to my trusted inclusions.  I don't care if you have any positive reviews or have done any trading at all.  It's my opinion that decisions about trust list inclusions/exclusions should be, to some degree detached from trade history.  Obviously overlaps will occur.

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.

I have a feeling I should review my reviews for accuracy and adherence to this opinion.

What really bothers me about this particular drama between hilariousetc and Timelord2067 is the death of humor.  It's pretty obvious that hilariousetal was making a joke about the applicable language, but I don't think it demonstrated any bias towards transgender people.  Much like thymos' post in the same thread.  I have close relatives and loved ones who are homosexual, and I don't see anything intentionally offensive in either post.

Fitting to disuses this today, because I'm a sucker for bDad jokes (happy father's day to all you papas out there,) but I can also have a pretty sick and twisted sense of humor at times.  No body is safe, and in the same vane, neither am I.  I think more of us need be able to laugh at ourselves more, and not take our own convictions so seriously that we cannot see the absurdity of dogma that lurks within.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

So you're saying I should just exclude him? I was trying to not need that.

If you think you disagree with enough of someone's feedbacks, you ought to exclude them with no question.  That goes for you, me, and everyone else.  You said yourself that you agree with a lot the trust Timelord2067 has left in the past, so I'd say if it hasn't reached the tipping point for you yet, don't exclude him.

There have been DT members who've left inappropriate negs for others in the past, and I didn't exclude them from my trust list.  There has to be some leeway IMO, because nobody's perfect.  But let's take JollyGood as an example: I didn't exclude him until he made a habit out of having a hairpin trigger with the red paint spray gun.  Otherwise his sent feedback is/was spot-on.

Timelord2067 has had questionable judgement ever since I became aware of him years ago, so I'm not going to be excluding him--nor am I going to argue that others shouldn't, though, because I would certainly understand why he'd be deserving of that.

Now if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever I might not want to deal with them because I disagree with their beliefs. THAT IS FEEDBACK.

Well, to each his own, but personally I don't care what beliefs a trade counterparty holds as long as they don't lead me to think that the person can't be trusted.  Being homophobic/racist/sexist shouldn't be a problem on a forum like this, since people generally don't know enough about each other to be prejudiced.  And someone can be prejudiced against a group of people and still carry out an honest deal with someone in that group, too.  It happens all the time in the real world.

[suchmoon]

Well, to each his own, but personally I don't care what beliefs a trade counterparty holds as long as they don't lead me to think that the person can't be trusted.  Being homophobic/racist/sexist shouldn't be a problem on a forum like this, since people generally don't know enough about each other to be prejudiced.  And someone can be prejudiced against a group of people and still carry out an honest deal with someone in that group, too.  It happens all the time in the real world.

I wouldn't neg someone for it, but someone holding absurdly irrational beliefs (like one race being inferior to another) for me would seem less trustworthy to do business with. It doesn't matter if they know someone's race/ethnicity/gender etc, their absurd beliefs are not based on facts or knowledge anyway.

Too often we see ethnic/racist/sexist/etc slurs used as "arguments" in disputes (for example see the recent drama with Koil) to think that prejudice here doesn't affect business.

[Poker Player]

I wouldn't neg someone for it, but someone holding absurdly irrational beliefs (like one race being inferior to another) for me would seem less trustworthy to do business with. It doesn't matter if they know someone's race/ethnicity/gender etc, their absurd beliefs are not based on facts or knowledge anyway.

Too often we see ethnic/racist/sexist/etc slurs used as "arguments" in disputes (for example see the recent drama with Koil) to think that prejudice here doesn't affect business.

In my case, it's not that I wouldn't do business with someone who believes, for example, that people of a certain ethical background are inferior, it's just that I don't have any kind of relationship with those people, let alone do business with them.

But I don't think you can apply the argument universally. Someone can have completely irrational beliefs and be very reliable for business.  From my radical atheist point of view, belief in god would be something similar, or that praying is going to have any influence in the real world,  and yet there are many believing people that pray you can do business with.

[yahoo62278]

Doesn't this fall under the category of things you should never talk about due to you're only gonna start a huge fight? Haven't you guys ever heard that? Don't talk about politics, religion, finances, etc!!!

You don't like someone or their view after you see a post of theirs, then exclude them. No reason to go on a crusade against that person. Just my opinion.

[DaveF]

I generally agree with you, but not with this:

Now if hilariousetc is a transphobe or homophobe or whatever I might not want to deal with them because I disagree with their beliefs. THAT IS FEEDBACK.

The big lie that Hilarious is supposedly somethingphobe based on that post should not be reflected in a feedback. Unless you mean neutral feedback, with where almost anything fits. 

I don't know if it was a confusion of terms or something.

What I was trying to get across is the fact that we have +/=/- for trust and you have to click on that to see what people wrote and why and so on.
IMO = is pointless. I doubt most people see it. AND for the most part things like what is being said about hilariousetc are 100% not important to trading.

Quoting myself:

One of the biggest assholes I know IRL is also the most honest.
Would buy / sell / trade stuff with him and not worry at all.
There is not enough money on the planet for me to want to hang out with him outside of business dealings.

If he was on this forum and I cared enough to type about it he would have 100s of positive trusts from me.
And about a billion what an ass he is.

I know it's been said that trust is for trade or trusting in general. But, people keep posting things there that are more about the person then their actions.

<shrug>
Once again, this forum is not eBay or Amazon, it's about BTC discussion.
Makes you wonder if we got rid of P&S / OT / Serious / Ivory / ALL the alts / Gambling (except as related to crypto casinos) this place would be better or worse.

-Dave

[PrimeNumber7]

This is about something that happened nearly two years ago.

Timelord2067 didn't reach DT until recently.

I believe he has been on and off DT for a while, or at least, he has been on and off my trust network.

Pro-tip -- don't go digging about things that have happened years ago, and attempt to litigate them today. By now, many people have seen the ratings in question and have had the opportunity to react appropriately.

So you're saying I should just exclude him? I was trying to not need that.

You can if you want to. However, regardless of if he is on or off DT, his ratings speak for themselves. This is particularly the case for the rating in question. I don't think anyone is going to take the rating in question seriously. My suggestion is to ignore the rating and move on.

Pro-tip: Timelord left that feedback two years ago on a post that was almost two years older than that so he had to do a lot of digging to find it. Maybe timelord should take heed instead of being a further hypocrite.

My post was certainly not intended to be a defense of Timelord2067.

Regarding the decision to exclude him:

You can if you want to. However, regardless of if he is on or off DT, his ratings speak for themselves. This is particularly the case for the rating in question. I don't think anyone is going to take the rating in question seriously. My suggestion is to ignore the rating and move on.

[LoyceV]

Doesn't this fall under the category of things you should never talk about due to you're only gonna start a huge fight? Haven't you guys ever heard that? Don't talk about politics, religion, finances, etc!!!

That leads to this:

the death of humor.

I believe humor is a great way to make heavy subjects lighter.

What happened to this?

(source)

[Poker Player]

That leads to this:

the death of humor.

I believe humor is a great way to make heavy subjects lighter.

Yes but the humorless ones are the ones who see supposedly homophobic statements in that post written by hilarious (and don't see them in theymos' post).

Neither hilarious nor theymos can be blamed for the death of humor in this case, quite the contrary.

[GazetaBitcoin]

It's ironic Timelord2067 accuses hilariousetc of Trust abuse.

TimeLord is just a troll, suffering from various drama which happened in his poor life and, as a consequence he is expressing here all his frustrations -- making an absurd accusation here, writing a false feedback there, lying for years that he is part of DT (while this unfortunate incident happened only recently), misusing (on purpose) Marketplace Trust system with Trust inclusions / exclusions and so on.

In my case, the old perv stated that (1) I am "a Troll going around the forum causing conflict and FUD" and (2) that  I am "playing a long game to build trust with a certain group within BCT".



Although I asked him, in several occasion, to justify his allegations, the poor lunatic never dared to do so. Of course, he had no base for making such statements about me. I am not a troll, I am not making conflicts and, for sure, I never created FUD. As for this part - "playing a long game to build trust with a certain group within BCT" - this is even more ridiculous than wolwoo's absurdities.

Be cautious with this user and try to avoid him (exclude him too, if you feel so) at all costs. He brings nothing but trouble.

[dkbit98]

What happened to this?

You sound like John Lennon dreamer in his song Imagine...
In reality there are some polar opposites that will never agree and they will never be friends.

TimeLord is just a troll, suffering from various drama which happened in his poor life and, as a consequence he is expressing here all his frustrations -- making an absurd accusation here, writing a false feedback there, lying for years that he is part of DT

I wonder why he isn't posting any replies in this topic, he is obviously following what is happening and sending merits to things he likes.
Giving negative feedbacks for someone else opinions just because you don't like them is so stupid and ridiculous.
Maybe it's time for more DT members exclusions.

I am not a troll

I said before that Troll definition is unclear, so anyone can have their own interpretation, and since trolling is not allowed in forum anyone can report trolling posts.
If I rememeber correctly, I don't think that I ever reported any post for trolling that resulted in them being deleted.