Creating a vote to remove Don Pedro Dinero from DT

[Why2why]

I'm about to start handing out tags to people in the following thread who say it's easy to get 2-5% daily returns from trading.

Is 2% or 5% profit impossible to be archived by a trader on a daily?

Obviously they would be neutral tags (for shitposting and misleading people) but I can imagine people complaining on this section and sending me PMs to remove them.
I basically explain to them why it's not like that and they still insist that it's easy for a trader to get 2-5% daily. I have based my rebuttal on the 2% daily scenario but to claim, and insist, that it is easy to get 5% daily in trading is to be an asshole basically.

Of course none of them have provided evidence that they are getting that ‘easy’ profitability.

Putting this up soon for the community to judge via votes, to possibly put an end to potential future attacks and intimidation of other forum members.
DTs like Don Pedro Dinero trying to use DTs' power to sensor what other forum members can write and post on this forum as information, this will eventually hurt the forum more in the long term since most members will be bullied into silence by some DTs who miss used their DTs power in the wrong way.

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

[Ambatman]

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

This is a nice suggestion but we all know people are going to exploit it.
So it's better to keep it simple the way it is and let fellow DTs be the final judge.
If there's any proof of a DT member misusing their power
The others wouldn't let it slide if it's shared as long as evidence exists.


And on DPD case? He hasn't done anything yet so I see no reason imo.

[Charles-Tim]

DT members to remove him is not yet worth it at all.

He created a thread about giving some people a neutral tag but if you check his trust page, he gave nobody any trust related to it. This means he used that thread to ask if it is worth it or not. But a good DT should know that is not how DT works.

He really needs to read more about what DT is used for.

[logfiles]

Putting this up soon for the community to judge via votes, to possibly put an end to potential future attacks and intimidation of other forum members.
DTs like Don Pedro Dinero trying to use DTs' power to sensor what other forum members can write and post on this forum as information, this will eventually hurt the forum more in the long term since most members will be bullied into silence by some DTs who miss used their DTs power in the wrong way.

I believe he was just asking for an opinion from other fellows whether it was OK to leave a tag to a particular case or not. Is it bad to ask for advice from fellow members?
If he had tagged some folks unfairly because of their opinions or beliefs, then that would be a case worth looking in to.

Do you have any case where he has unfairly left negative feedback to a member? Please put it up in this thread for all to see and judge.

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

It's actually there.
It's through trust list exclusions " ~ " by other members, and it has worked in the past. Sometimes, even admin can step in and blacklist someone from becoming a DT member. I think I have seen such cases before but mostly when things get so bad.

[Vod]

OP - you are too new to call for a vote against a much senior member.   The community understands that conflict happens, and they generally will side on the person they trust more, right?   Trust comes from time, and he has been here a lot longer than you.

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

It's built into the DT system. 

[examplens]

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

There is no point in voting in this case.
DT lists are a matter of personal belief of each member, so for example, if you or Don Pedro Dinero (or anyone else) will edit my DT list (voting or in any way), then I going to exclude myself from the DT system.

If you think that someone does not deserve a place in DT, then state the reasons for your claim and address the members with whom Don Pedro Dinero's judgment is Trusted.

He created a thread about giving some people a neutral tag but if you check his trust page, he gave nobody any trust related to it. This means he used that thread to ask if it is worth it or not. But a good DT should know that is not how DT works.

He really needs to read more about what DT is used for.

Opening that thread, where he asks others' opinions if a situation is worth giving a neutral tag, is probably a good step for learning the basic principles of the DT system. Instead of leaving the neutral (or even negative) tag first, he decided to ask the other members for their opinions.
I always support, if someone doesn't know something, better ask.

[LoyceV]

~to possibly put an end to potential future attacks and intimidation of other forum members.

Your quote misses Don Pedro Dinero's topic title: I would like to ask the DTs for their opinion on this case. He's asking for opinions before doing anything. Nothing wrong with that, and so far most of the responses in his topic are opposing the idea.

DTs like Don Pedro Dinero trying to use DTs' power to sensor what other forum members can write and post on this forum as information

Users can't censor other users' posts. Well, you can, since this topic is self-moderated. But feedback doesn't change anyone's ability to post.

OP - you are too new to call for a vote against a much senior member.

Allow me to oppose this statement: I think new users should be able to question anyone's motives if they feel like it. That doesn't mean they're always right, but they should be able to post about it. About anything for that matter.

The community understands that conflict happens, and they generally will side on the person they trust more, right?

I don't think Trust matters in this, it's about arguments.

[robelneo]

There should be a voting system where forum members can vote out any DTs they feel are not supporting the forum and use DTs' power to bully others in the form of threats.

If this is a discussion about a voting system, then why is this thread moderated? You open a discussion about democratic settings, and yet you want to have control over who can post and what can be posted; you do not even have a disclaimer or note on why this thread is moderated.
And no, I will not vote; there's a difference between action and arguments, and if you only check Don Pedro Dinero tags, he always asks for consensus before giving one.

I would like to read opinions from the community before, if appropriate, proceeding to leave more tags.

[hugeblack]

Please lock this topic, if we remove anyone who asks before making a decision then the DT list will be filled with messy members and will be useless.

[Liliana1304]

OP - you are too new to call for a vote against a much senior member.   The community understands that conflict happens, and they generally will side on the person they trust more, right?   Trust comes from time, and he has been here a lot longer than you.

According to Logfiles, Don Pedro was asking for opinions on whether it's cool to leave neutral trust flags to users who seem to mislead the public, right? And being that he didn't use it on anyone was what made it obvious that it was just an opinion he was asking for and I think that since the Op felt it was a gross misuse of power and "suggested" that Pedro be removed from the DT, is it not an opinion he is also giving?
Or is there a proper period of time before one needs to start making such requests?

I understand that the words of a newbie when weighed against that of a reputable member of this place does not really hold much water but should it mean they too can't say it?

[memehunter]

No need at all.
On the contrary, he is putting in extra effort to make his tags more accurate. I mean, just look at the recent case (which might have prompted you), why would someone create a dedicated thread before giving his tag (no matter what my opinions about the nature of the thread) and asking for opinions? I am sure he is wise enough to know that he will be getting some backlash from the community.
How can one fulfill his responsibility well if not enough freedom is given? Presenting what you feel in public discourse and learn from it, is the very essence of this forum. 

[OgNasty]

According to Logfiles, Don Pedro was asking for opinions on whether it's cool to leave neutral trust flags to users who seem to mislead the public, right? And being that he didn't use it on anyone was what made it obvious that it was just an opinion he was asking for and I think that since the Op felt it was a gross misuse of power and "suggested" that Pedro be removed from the DT, is it not an opinion he is also giving?
Or is there a proper period of time before one needs to start making such requests?

I understand that the words of a newbie when weighed against that of a reputable member of this place does not really hold much water but should it mean they too can't say it?

LOL. If we’re giving trust ratings for misleading people then I could call out half of the DT members for lies that they’ve said about me. Imagine spending 13 years of your life donating free electricity, cooling, and space in your home to mine on behalf of the community and give those coins away, then have people spreading lies that you’re running a ponzi or lying to people. There are many in DT and even in this thread who do that, while having never given a satoshi to this forum or any Bitcoin organization. When it comes to the default trust network, it’s laughably filled with bad actors trying to tear down others to make a name for themselves. That’s why a majority of the talent that comes here leaves. The people responsible for this lunacy need to take a hard look in the mirror. Do they want to be a big fish in a dry pond, or do they want to support Bitcoin projects and help grow Bitcoin’s community? Unfortunately, I know the answer already.

[Vod]

then have people spreading lies that you’re running a ponzi or lying to people.

OgNasty - you named it your passthrough ponzi.  How is that a lie?  Here is the thread:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0

If you can name a single lie a DT member has left you, the community will call them out.  Now is your chance.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

He created a thread about giving some people a neutral tag but if you check his trust page, he gave nobody any trust related to it. This means he used that thread to ask if it is worth it or not. But a good DT should know that is not how DT works.

I haven't finished reading that whole thread yet but it was my understanding that at least part of the reason DPD wanted to leave neutrals was because people in his reference thread were shitposting with the common theme that traders could make 2-5% a day, not necessarily the opinion about them being able to make that much.

Even if it was just about the latter, he was only proposing to leave neutral feedbacks, not negative ones, and frankly it's always been acceptable (or at least not punishable by other DT members) to leave neutrals for whatever reason.  I don't think any feedback should be left because of differences in viewpoint or because a DT member thinks someone is telling a lie that isn't for the purpose of scamming, but at the end of the day a neutral does nothing to a member's trust score....and the whole trust system is a broken mess anyway.

So no, I don't think Don Pedro Dinero should be booted from DT or that there ought to be a new voting mechanism.  There already is one to boot DT members, the trust exclusion option.

[Why2why]

Timelord carry out your threat, you threaten to red tag my account, another act of abuse of your DTs power same thing your alts are doing, red tagging user for none scam cases.

[yahoo62278]

Timelord carry out your threat, you threaten to red tag my account, another act of abuse of your DTs power same thing your alts are doing, red tagging user for none scam cases.

Timelord is not DT, his tags are only going to show up if someone has him in their trust list. They'll still be on your account, but not visible unless someone goes in and looks at your profile.

[nutildah]

Timelord carry out your threat, you threaten to red tag my account, another act of abuse of your DTs power same thing your alts are doing, red tagging user for none scam cases.

Timelord is not DT, his tags are only going to show up if someone has him in their trust list. They'll still be on your account, but not visible unless someone goes in and looks at your profile.

For years he's been making the trust system even more confusing by referring to anybody's trust list as "DT Trust"... I asked him what did he think "DT" stood for a couple of times and he ignored me.

As to HH - they didn't look very far to spread their merits nore notice the five-alts connection staring them in the face both merit swapping as well as DT trust/distrust.

Its probably more efficient to say you are "adding a user to your trust list" or "distrusting a user"... but c'est la vie.

Regardless, Timelord didn't actually threaten this user with a negative tag, and we actually have something in common where we think its kinda ball-less to reply from an alt account.

And for the record I don't think Timelord has any secret alt accounts. At least not ones that are red tagging users.

[logfiles]

OP - you are too new to call for a vote against a much senior member.   The community understands that conflict happens, and they generally will side on the person they trust more, right?   Trust comes from time, and he has been here a lot longer than you.

According to Logfiles, Don Pedro was asking for opinions on whether it's cool to leave neutral trust flags to users who seem to mislead the public, right? And being that he didn't use it on anyone was what made it obvious that it was just an opinion he was asking for and I think that since the Op felt it was a gross misuse of power and "suggested" that Pedro be removed from the DT, is it not an opinion he is also giving?
Or is there a proper period of time before one needs to start making such requests?

I understand that the words of a newbie when weighed against that of a reputable member of this place does not really hold much water but should it mean they too can't say it?

Most of the brand-new accounts that have so much interest in the reputation board are just sockpuppet accounts of some people who don't want you to use their main accounts, that's why most old members here don't take them serious. But if you read OP's post and tone, i don't think it's an opinion (that why it was even self-moderated. He complains about censorship but.....)

Read again from the title and tell me if it was just an opinion.

Besides most DT members are sane enough. They wouldn't let anything crazy go for so long without criticizing or acting, removing someone who grossly abuses DT.

[Liliana1304]

According to Logfiles, Don Pedro was asking for opinions on whether it's cool to leave neutral trust flags to users who seem to mislead the public, right? And being that he didn't use it on anyone was what made it obvious that it was just an opinion he was asking for and I think that since the Op felt it was a gross misuse of power and "suggested" that Pedro be removed from the DT, is it not an opinion he is also giving?
Or is there a proper period of time before one needs to start making such requests?

I understand that the words of a newbie when weighed against that of a reputable member of this place does not really hold much water but should it mean they too can't say it?

LOL. If we’re giving trust ratings for misleading people then I could call out half of the DT members for lies that they’ve said about me. Imagine spending 13 years of your life donating free electricity, cooling, and space in your home to mine on behalf of the community and give those coins away, then have people spreading lies that you’re running a ponzi or lying to people. There are many in DT and even in this thread who do that, while having never given a satoshi to this forum or any Bitcoin organization. When it comes to the default trust network, it’s laughably filled with bad actors trying to tear down others to make a name for themselves. That’s why a majority of the talent that comes here leaves. The people responsible for this lunacy need to take a hard look in the mirror. Do they want to be a big fish in a dry pond, or do they want to support Bitcoin projects and help grow Bitcoin’s community? Unfortunately, I know the answer already.

In essence you're saying that everyone is entitled to their opinions about you and you don't give two shits about it eh? Maybe these"allegations" against you could hold some truth to it even if you regard them as lies, right? But then what do I know?

I think the misuse of power is everywhere and if you say you've being doing nothing but good to the community, let those works speak for you rather than pointing it out?

[Timelord2067]

Timelord carry out your threat, you threaten to red tag my account, another act of abuse of your DTs power same thing your alts are doing, red tagging user for none scam cases.

Deleting my post just proves my point - doesn't it ... Krew?

( I said no such thing - check out what I really wrote - https://ninjastic.space/topic/5528979 )

Head in the sand...

I'm laughing at both of you.