Till when should we keep up with abusive behaviour?

[mrust_mobile]

These drifts are very dangerous, it's a moment to move from a free forum to a "police" forum

Over the years, I'm more and more appreciative of theymos' hands-off policies for Bitcointalk

If nobody decides what is truth and what is fud, why do (or did) we tag bcash/bsv fanatics?

Tagging isn't the same as disallowing

Practically we disallowed them to conduct any business in this forum. It is not that we disallowed their freedom of speech but i think there is a connection.

[babo]

These drifts are very dangerous, it's a moment to move from a free forum to a "police" forum

Over the years, I'm more and more appreciative of theymos' hands-off policies for Bitcointalk

If nobody decides what is truth and what is fud, why do (or did) we tag bcash/bsv fanatics?

Tagging isn't the same as disallowing

Bitcoin is freedom, this is what was given to us as a legacy by Satoshi Nakamoto.
The day the freedom to say what one thinks ceases in the forum, in this forum, it will mean that something serious will have happened.
I don't like these Nazi tendencies and I don't like those who have these ideas.

I accept that everyone has their own ideas, I don't condemn anyone, but no one can stop me from saying that doing these operations (LoyceV rightly opposes) is a colossal bullshit
and the more we delve into the discussion the more we understand the character of the person who proposes this colossal bullshit

I think I've said it all, I don't think I'll answer again, I already understand who we're dealing with from these statements

[DireWolfM14]

Giving a false positive just doesn't seem like the right path. If you think about it, it's kinda the same as giving a false/incorrect negative. Using the trust system incorrectly.

Exactly the point I'm trying to make.

@DireWolfM14 Satofan is a smart dude but he can't controll his temper and often acts like a bozo. This achieved nothing and functionally makes the forum a worse place for everyone. You didn't have to reward this behaviour "just because".

It wasn't "just because."  It was to offset what I see as trust abuse.  DT members should have a thicker skin, and should not wield their power to punish someone for being "a bozo."  The ramifications are real, and anyone of us could be next if this president continues.

That makes no sense.

You saw a guy being personally abusive against other members, constantly using swear words, spamming off topic responses and being openly racist to advance his goals and thought there were go, let's do him a solid by participating in trust abuse. The very practice you said you dislike?

Correct. Think of it as a protest, to demonstrate how neither a red tag nor a green make any sense in this case.  If those red tags ceased to exist, there would be no reason for my tag and I would remove it.

No matter how abusive his words are, they can't hurt you unless you choose to let them.  Use the ignore button, and grow a thicker skin.  This isn't about Satafan44 specifically, this is about the responsibilities of DT to do better.

[LoyceV]

No matter how abusive his words are, they can't hurt you unless you choose to let them.

It's amazing how many people, and I'm talking about adults, choose to let words hurt them. We teach kids better than that:

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never harm me.

[alani123]

I get your protest but I'd say you could show some class and abstain from behaviours you also find hypocritical.
Anyway since reading your messages here you're not the one to blame and what you say actually makes sense so I'd say do what you want. I trust your judgement, probably a positive rating to a troll won't stay there forever. Or even if it does, w/e.

The other thing though is that people do actually care about ratings in their profile. Whole Satofan is too much of a troll he's surely been taking advantage of this.

[mrust_mobile]

No matter how abusive his words are, they can't hurt you unless you choose to let them.

It's amazing how many people, and I'm talking about adults, choose to let words hurt them. We teach kids better than that:

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never harm me.

Words can harm people.

See OG vs Vod

When it goes beyond name calling, cursing, profanity it can get dangerous and with enough motivation, it can get beyond that. Threatening of physical violence and fabrication of fake stories to harm someone’s reputation are good examples.

[Satofan44]

Another way of change would be the disallowing of posting Bitcoin FUD by signature campaign participants, which would make sense.

This takes away users freedom of speech and goes against everything this forum stands for IMO.

So you want censorship for others but not for yourself? And don't get me started on who's going to decide what is or isn't FUD.

You misunderstood completely, that has nothing to do with the freedom of speech of the forum. The campaign manager can require participants to post in whatever way they want. They already are doing that -- whoever does not like the requirements can choose not to join a campaign.

If you are being paid in BTC by someone, it makes perfect sense that you are not going to get paid for posting FUD about Bitcoin or about the person that is paying you. Get real, and grow up. That this is already not a thing just indicates that neither most of the managers nor most of the companies that are running the campaigns really care about Bitcoin, it is all about dirty dollars. Perhaps Coinbase should take some advice from you and invest a few million dollars in marketing slogans against Bitcoin.  

I don't like these Nazi tendencies and I don't like those who have these ideas.

Seriously, fuck off with that biased bullshit from modernism. You arbitrarily draw the line where freedom of speech stops, therefore you are extremely biased like most people on this topic. Either freedom of speech is absolute or it does not exist, and if it is absolute then anyone can call you whatever they want including a pedophile without consequence. Yes I've seen your comments on this topic. There are already a number of laws and many precedents due to which where real freedom of speech does not exist anymore. Don't bring it up where it doesn't belong -- such as in the case of someone deciding which post they are willing to pay for. Many of you who tend to talk about free speech actually don't want it, especially not when times get a little bit tough.

The free speech we enjoy here is priceless, it does not exist anywhere else on the Internet.

Exactly, it is pretty much a dead concept -- and then someone brings up Nazi bullshit. At that point the argument is already lost.

[babo]

Seriously, fuck off with that biased bullshit from modernism. You arbitrarily draw the line where freedom of speech stops, therefore you are extremely biased like most people on this topic. Either freedom of speech is absolute or it does not exist, and if it is absolute then anyone can call you whatever they want including a pedophile without consequence. Yes I've seen your comments on this topic. There are already a number of laws and many precedents due to which where real freedom of speech does not exist anymore. Don't bring it up where it doesn't belong -- such as in the case of someone deciding which post they are willing to pay for. Many of you who tend to talk about free speech actually don't want it, especially not when times get a little bit tough.

freedom of speech always exists in any case
you are free to say what you want
and I'm free to think you're wrong, that's freedom

But your freedom ends where mine or anyone else's begins, that's how the concept of freedom works.
this in my opinion, but maybe I'm wrong

[Satofan44]

freedom of speech always exists in any case
you are free to say what you want
and I'm free to think you're wrong, that's freedom

But your freedom ends where mine or anyone else's begins, that's how the concept of freedom works.
this in my opinion, but maybe I'm wrong

Me calling you names, whether insults or criminal activities, does not "end your freedom". Encroaching on your freedom would be going on a harassing campaign against you. So instead of calling you a criminal (let's use this nicer general terms, instead of more nasty specific terms like pedophiles) occasionally, I start going to everywhere you go and calling you criminal in front of others. I buy a billboard that calls you a criminal, and so forth.

What we have really have today is a malicious trick where they branded limited speech as free speech so that the average people don't start rioting (as if they would anyways, they are too busy with Netflix and other mind numbing crap). Therefore:
1) Don't bring this free speech shit here, we don't have it.
2) It is completely misplaced anyway, since I did not say that the forum rules should be modified -- I said that the campaign managers should stop paying for FUD. That is perfectly sensible, and pretty much all marketing in existence does it that way (except when there is a strategy of doing the opposite -- but that is not applicable in our consideration as such circumstances can not exist here).

[babo]

Me calling you names, whether insults or criminal activities, does not "end your freedom". Encroaching on your freedom would be going on a harassing campaign against you. So instead of calling you a criminal (let's use this nicer general terms, instead of more nasty specific terms like pedophiles) occasionally, I start going to everywhere you go and calling you criminal in front of others. I buy a billboard that calls you a criminal, and so forth.

What we have really have today is a malicious trick where they branded limited speech as free speech so that the average people don't start rioting (as if they would anyways, they are too busy with Netflix and other mind numbing crap). Therefore:
1) Don't bring this free speech shit here, we don't have it.
2) It is completed misplaced anyway, since I did not say that the forum rules should be modified -- I said that the campaign managers should stop paying for FUD. That is perfectly sensible, and pretty much all marketing in existence does it that way.  

but I'm calm
I understand what you mean, you can imagine if I'll take it personally
in fact I simply tried to mediate if you saw everything here
I am a person who seeks peace for all, not war... this is the basis of course, then there are situations and situations
I understand your point

[LoyceV]

I said that the campaign managers should stop paying for FUD.

What makes you think you're in a position to make such demands? You're free to start your own campaign in which you don't pay for anything you call FUD.

[Satofan44]

I said that the campaign managers should stop paying for FUD.

What makes you think you're in a position to make such demands? You're free to start your own campaign in which you don't pay for anything you call FUD.

Where did I demand it? You're reading too much into it, which started with the error in the interpretation of the initial post. It would be better for everyone if they did things in that way, there is no denying it (and that it has no impact on freedom of speech at all) -- therefore yes they should, but that doesn't mean that they will.