Till when should we keep up with abusive behaviour?

[mrust_mobile]

It is impossible for me to be of any trade risk to anyone, therefore your opinion is wrong for whatever reason I don't care -- you are still an idiot.

This is not directly related with the topic but this line doesn’t make sense.

You may say “I won’t ever do any trades here so I am not capable of possessing any financial risk.”

That reasoning is flawed because people don’t get trust ratings based on their own plans for their future.

They get positive trust ratings (at least they were supposed to) for successfully completing a trade (could be a collectibles trade or a loan, might be running a successful sig camp) , and negatives for cheating. ( multi accounting mostly or not paying back a loan in time)

So your words don’t count. It is how the dt sees you what counts.

[Lucius]

~snip~

And as for @Satofan44, our paths crossed a couple of times in some topics where he reminded me of some old members with his writing style.

A rational person with a theory, this could be entertaining. Share it here or in PM if you don't want to involve yourself in drama.   Today was more entertaining, popcorn is pretty expensive these days for so much action.

I'm just saying that your style of "expression" reminds me of some old members who are no longer active, but I wouldn't mention names because it makes no sense. I don't find any of this entertaining, but people have different ways of having fun, especially if they don't have to pay for it.

My background is completely irrelevant and I won't bring it up here to create a naive defense. However, you need to stop trying to manipulate the public with lies and just accept that you are an idiot and that you are wrong. I have already explained why.
~snip~

I'm really interested in one thing - do you get more pleasure from calling people idiots online or do you do it in real life too? Usually those who act like this online are no bigger than a small mouse in real life. It's easy to call someone an idiot or an asshole when you can't look them in the eye, right?

[Satofan44]

It is impossible for me to be of any trade risk to anyone, therefore your opinion is wrong for whatever reason I don't care -- you are still an idiot.

This is not directly related with the topic but this line doesn’t make sense.

You may say “I won’t ever do any trades here so I am not capable of possessing any financial risk.”

That reasoning is flawed because people don’t get trust ratings based on their own plans for their future.

How can I be a risk to a system in which I will not participate? The system is entirely based on trade-risk, and if I will never engage in any trade behavior then it is logically impossible for me to have any risk. lovesmayfamilis has stated that they will never ask for a loan, so despite of this she could pose a potential loan risk according to your reasoning? How?

I'm just saying that your style of "expression" reminds me of some old members who are no longer active, but I wouldn't mention names because it makes no sense. I don't find any of this entertaining, but people have different ways of having fun, especially if they don't have to pay for it.

You did mention it though, you just didn't name names.   All right, that is perfectly fine and your choice.

I'm really interested in one thing - do you get more pleasure from calling people idiots online or do you do it in real life too? Usually those who act like this online are no bigger than a small mouse in real life. It's easy to call someone an idiot or an asshole when you can't look them in the eye, right?

Perhaps an absence of idiots in my surroundings make it easier not to do that often, but yes sometimes we do call each other an idiot when a big blunder is made in system analysis. The kind that you should not make, because you should know better or have sufficient experience to do better. The people that would respond with aggression to being called an idiot or asshole are closer to the animal kingdom than they are to humans, they are generally to be avoided in any context if you have any rationality in you -- they shouldn't even be allowed to exist, but democracy and capitalism needs its slaves. Alternatively, having a weapon and living in a stand your ground place helps against such degenerate mongrels. Perhaps I should admit here things like this give me energy. I can essentially go on for ever against stupid people, no shitty illegal drugs that some users are leniently discussing in some sections can match this. It may be weird and unusual, but it does work.

If you look at this forum, 99% of the people who are posting are from the 3rd world and are shitposters. There are a few extremely good posters, but they can't balance this stuff out on their own. What is worse, it seems that the situation is actively degenerating here and not improving at all -- this indicates that the corruption is deep, systematic. It must include merit sources, staff members, DT members. There is no grand conspiracy, so don't dismiss things with that fallacious counter argument. There are simply many different corrupt groups, fighting to abuse this place in many ways possible -- for a very wide variety of reasons.

I made it easy for you, even gave you examples so you could figure it out.

This is not exactly what I was talking about, my statement was rather limited solely to actual trade behavior. However, I get your point now and agree with it -- hence the merit. I won't respond to it further to avoid going too far off-topic, so the update is included here.

[mrust_mobile]

It is impossible for me to be of any trade risk to anyone, therefore your opinion is wrong for whatever reason I don't care -- you are still an idiot.

This is not directly related with the topic but this line doesn’t make sense.

You may say “I won’t ever do any trades here so I am not capable of possessing any financial risk.”

That reasoning is flawed because people don’t get trust ratings based on their own plans for their future.

How can I be a risk to a system in which I will not participate? The system is entirely based on trade-risk, and if I will never engage in any trade behavior then it is logically impossible for me to have any risk. lovesmayfamilis has stated that they will never ask for a loan, so despite of this she could pose a potential loan risk according to your reasoning? How?

I made it easy for you, even gave you examples so you could figure it out.

Let me unpack that shiet further.

let's say you, me or lovemyfamily says "I can't possess any danger to any of you financially because I will never ever be doing any trades in this forum. Never. Mark my words."

Then,

You, me or luvmyfamily was found cheating campaigns with multi accounts.

What happens?

Right, nobody cares what you, me or she said before. DT sees the abuse and hands the neg rating. Your plans or what you said dont mean nothing in this scenario. What matters is what you did, your actions.

[LoyceV]

The point of this topic is that even though there's freedom of speech here, there should be a line of when it's too much.

Don't you realize this is a slippery slope? Once you start censoring people because you don't like their speech, who's going to decide what is or isn't allowed? You? Theymos? Me?

I'll emphasize this part of my post again, because those 2 people can explain the problem much better than I can, and I encourage you to spend 12 minutes listening to this:

You should spend 2.5 minutes to listen to this guy: the only proper response to someone who says: "I'm offended!" is: "I don't care!".

Here's another 9 minutes worth of your time: Rowan Atkinson on free speech.

For me, the best way to increase society's resistance to insulting or offensive speech is to allow a lot more of it. As with childhood diseases, you can better resist those germs to which you have been exposed. We need to build our immunity to taking offence, so that we can deal with the issues that perfectly justified criticism can raise. Our priority should be to deal with the message, not the messenger.

I had seen his interactions with others a long time before we even interacted, and was still frustrated by the way he talked to other users.

If reading things on the internet is what frustrates you, maybe the internet isn't for you
If freedom of speech frustrates you, that's kinda the point: it's supposed to make you think about things, and if you decide you don't like it, that's totally fine! Ignore him, that's fine too. Why torture yourself reading things you don't like? But it does not give you the right to silence others. At least not on Bitcointalk.

I'm really interested in one thing - do you get more pleasure from calling people idiots online or do you do it in real life too? Usually those who act like this online are no bigger than a small mouse in real life. It's easy to call someone an idiot or an asshole when you can't look them in the eye, right?

It's certainly less likely to get a black eye online

[TypoTonic]

The point of this topic is that even though there's freedom of speech here, there should be a line of when it's too much.

I gave you merit here since you were willing to revise your feedback to neutral (and I see that you did). However, if this was truly your concern, it would have made more sense to start a topic in Meta, and maybe argue there that a rule against hate speech should be added.

[Ultegra134]

~Snipped~

Perhaps "frustrated" wasn't the right word. It's just annoying and something I don't believe suits any kind of forum, whether it's about free speech or not. Not that excessive, racism slurs and insults shouldn't be part of any community, whether that's online or not.

I gave you merit here since you were willing to revise your feedback to neutral (and I see that you did). However, if this was truly your concern, it would have made more sense to start a topic in Meta, and maybe argue there that a rule against hate speech should be added.

I wasn't sure where to post this, I was between Meta and Reputation.

[suchmoon]

Excuse me, I'm new here, is Satofan44 Lauda's new account?

One thing that will never change on this forum even as it slowly drowns in AI slop is the thin-skinned trust spam.

Someone said something unpleasant about Bitcoin - RED TAG THEM BECAUSE BAD WORDS ABOUT BITCOIN WILL LEAD PEOPLE TO SHITCOIN SCAMS!!!

Someone said something unpleasant about another user - RED TAG THEM BECAUSE SOMEONE WHO USES 4 LETTER WORDS CAN'T BE TRUSTED!!!

Even ChatGPT can't make this up.

[Vod]

You may say “I won’t ever do any trades here so I am not capable of possessing any financial risk.”

I have a legal document from our forum bozo stating I'm not qualified for any damages because he thinks I never did business here.  

I'd never experienced the level of freedom as on this forum, and it was exhilarating.  I got to express my views on religious cults, flat earth freaks and Trump supporters.   But when does the behaviour become abusive?  When the attacks become personal, dishonest and malicious.   When they continue for almost a decade under the guise of personal humor and start to actively chase developers away.  <-- Or when they change meaning based on removed context.

One thing that will never change on this forum even as it slowly drowns in AI slop is the thin-skinned trust spam.

You helped me a lot in my darkest hours.   If you and IB ever want, I can refund the BTC you paid with interest for BPIP.  

[God Of Thunder]

Honestly the more you reply the more you show reasons why you might not be good for DT.

You gave a red tag to a user for not liking his words basically. His words have nothing to do with trading and being high risk. Then you added a user to counteract others exclusions. I have seen this done in the past but it's rare that it's done.

I want to quote my friend DireWolf14 here.

There are rare occasions where I use them to offset the abuse of others.

If you check my feedback page, you'll see that I haven't left such feedback on people's profiles before, and I don't plan to do so.

As for not liking his words, let me tell you in detail.

People with such a terrible personality cannot be trusted at all. "words" reflect their personality. It's not about liking or disliking his words; it's about his personality. His personality suggests high potential for conflict, unfair reputational damage, or unreliable interactions, especially in a trust-based environment like the Bitcointalk forum.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

People with such a terrible personality cannot be trusted at all. "words" reflect their personality. It's not about liking or disliking his words; it's about his personality. His personality suggests high potential for conflict, unfair reputational damage, or unreliable interactions, especially in a trust-based environment like the Bitcointalk forum.

That's right, it seems that some people take ‘trade risk’ to mean the absurd idea that you can only red tag someone if they have previously scammed you.

In some cases, it is not necessary to have traded with someone in order to not trust them in business. And that's not just on the forum, but in real life as well.

Personally, I wouldn't trade even 0.0001 Bitcoin with Smartard44.

[babo]

People with such a terrible personality cannot be trusted at all. "words" reflect their personality. It's not about liking or disliking his words; it's about his personality. His personality suggests high potential for conflict, unfair reputational damage, or unreliable interactions, especially in a trust-based environment like the Bitcointalk forum.

You're right, in fact, your reasoning makes perfect sense and it's not a subjective supposition but an objective one.
when you have a shitty character, making trades becomes complicated and also very unpleasant
You have to be afraid to make a trade because the other person might get angry over trivial things and give you a negative trust.

well you're right

[Kasabus]

You're right, in fact, your reasoning makes perfect sense and it's not a subjective supposition but an objective one.
when you have a shitty character, making trades becomes complicated and also very unpleasant
You have to be afraid to make a trade because the other person might get angry over trivial things and give you a negative trust.

Even in the real world, when you apply for a non-collateral loan where they only check your capacity to pay and your character, both still have to match. You need to pass the character investigation. If you fail that part, your loan gets denied right away.

Same with job applications. You might have a strong resume and you might be technically capable, but if your character is bad you can’t work with a team, you always think you’re right, you look down on people instead of helping them learn, and your criticism is destructive instead of constructive, that becomes a problem. You become a risk to the business, because one wrong move from someone who’s part of the team can still cause financial issues, even in an indirect way.

[babo]

Even in the real world, when you apply for a non-collateral loan where they only check your capacity to pay and your character, both still have to match. You need to pass the character investigation. If you fail that part, your loan gets denied right away.

Same with job applications. You might have a strong resume and you might be technically capable, but if your character is bad you can’t work with a team, you always think you’re right, you look down on people instead of helping them learn, and your criticism is destructive instead of constructive, that becomes a problem. You become a risk to the business, because one wrong move from someone who’s part of the team can still cause financial issues, even in an indirect way.

I honestly don't know if it works like this for the loan, I'm not familiar with it.
but for work, even when I've done interviews, if the person has a prickly character I give a negative rating
We don't want rock stars who break the harmony, we don't need a soloist at work but a team that works together.

[suchmoon]

People with such a terrible personality cannot be trusted at all.

when you have a shitty character, making trades becomes complicated and also very unpleasant

You need to pass the character investigation.

All this does is give you some small personal satisfaction of seeing someone whose character you dislike having a red tag (a bit more of an ego boost if you're a DT member because more people see it).

It has little or nothing to do with actual risk, and with logic like that you're just asking to get scammed by a smooth-talking con artist.

Getting offended on the internet is so 1990s, grow up.

[babo]

All this does is give you some small personal satisfaction of seeing someone whose character you dislike having a red tag (a bit more of an ego boost if you're a DT member because more people see it).

It has little or nothing to do with actual risk, and with logic like that you're just asking to get scammed by a smooth-talking con artist.

Getting offended on the internet is so 1990s, grow up.

boy, I didn't give any red tags

so before you say things check I was just evaluating what was said that in fact, if I were a "small" user I would be afraid to trade with a person who gets angry easily and rants
I just said this and it seems to me to be objectively true and not subjective.

I don't allow myself to be told "grow up" when I've been a mature and adult person

[LoyceV]

It has little or nothing to do with actual risk, and with logic like that you're just asking to get scammed by a smooth-talking con artist.

Got it. Be nice if you want to scam people. That actually makes sense, and I'm pretty sure more people fall for friendly scammers than for unfriendly ones. Let's start tagging anyone who's ever been polite, because scammers are also polite!

[suchmoon]

boy, I didn't give any red tags

Good for you. You're defending this kind of behavior though. I'm offended by that. Should I red tag you?

Got it. Be nice if you want to scam people. That actually makes sense, and I'm pretty sure more people fall for friendly scammers than for unfriendly ones. Let's start tagging anyone who's ever been polite, because scammers are also polite!

Phew, luckily I can't ever be accused of being polite, definitely not a scammer.

[Satofan44]

People with such a terrible personality cannot be trusted at all. "words" reflect their personality. It's not about liking or disliking his words; it's about his personality. His personality suggests high potential for conflict, unfair reputational damage, or unreliable interactions, especially in a trust-based environment like the Bitcointalk forum.

Nope, this is the same manipulative bullshit that you would dismiss when it was done from my end. Following your "reasoning": It is about you hiring shitposters, about you running campaigns like a 3rd world pajeet. It is about someone else posting misinformation about Bitcoin. All of these suggest high potential for unreliable interactions, especially in a trust-based environment like the Bitcointalk forum. Alright, now all my tags are valid and you need to include me back into DT.

Sounds good?  

It has little or nothing to do with actual risk, and with logic like that you're just asking to get scammed by a smooth-talking con artist.

Got it. Be nice if you want to scam people. That actually makes sense, and I'm pretty sure more people fall for friendly scammers than for unfriendly ones. Let's start tagging anyone who's ever been polite, because scammers are also polite!

Exactly. The risk with this type of "personality" is actually lower if a proper analysis is done, but the pajeets like God Of Thunder are unable to do an analysis. When scammers are compared as a single group, the majority of that group are going to be smooth talkers. How is someone like me going to scam another person when I'm going to tell them that they are fucking retarded as soon as they make the first basic mistake?  

Excuse me, I'm new here, is Satofan44 Lauda's new account?

Another theory, entertaining. Let me grab more popcorn.   One at a time please, there is too much history to read into. Anyway, we need more of your kind here. Why are you not as active these days?

[babo]

Good for you. You're defending this kind of behavior though. I'm offended by that. Should I red tag you?

I was just looking for what God of Thunder meant

You're right too, behaving like this (I know you're pretending/joke/for make me understand) is bullying.
but in fact I didn't put any red trust, I was just saying that I also understand that anyone with such an aggressive attitude would have problems then relating to a trade
that's all
Satofan does a good job, he's just too aggressive in my opinion

then you can be kind without necessarily being a scammer, in my opinion
we are making it a bigger problem than it is I repeat