BitcoinGirl.club is a perverted liar - support my flag to end the drama

[Vod]

But... uhhh, your flag is inactive due to the need of net +1 opposition or support. Currently it's net +1 opposition from DTs, with ]as the time this post made] two DT oppose it and only one DT [the flag creator] support it, resulting in -1 DT support. You'll need 2 more DT support.

Is this a bug then?  Shouldn't a flag show the same even if I have a custom trust?

[dragonvslinux]

Because it'd be the right thing to do and that's what DT members are supposed to be doing. If you get 2 DT members supporting this, I'll remove my opposition (as my current basis for it would be somewhat invalidated). That sound fair? Just ping me.

No, I don't want to force DT members to do anything based on someone's opinion of "the right thing".

Me neither, that we can certainly agree on.

If you are willing to remove your opposition, maybe it's you that is starting new drama?

I'm willing to remove my opposition if my assessment is inaccurate, as I'm willing to accept if I am wrong here. My intuition tells me otherwise though.

To clarify incase there is any ambiguity regarding "which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with": I don't believe any knowledgeable & reasonable DT member does agree with this, on the basis that they haven't. Either that or they are all more spineless than I thought. Happy to be proven wrong though, other members I trust could even persuade me if they believe I've made a mistake.

[Vod]

I'm willing to remove my opposition if my assessment is inaccurate, as I'm willing to accept if I am wrong here. My intuition tells me otherwise though.

Understandable.  You were invited to this recently and were not witness to the perverted lies she wrote before.    You are reasonable but not knowledgeable on the subject. 

[holydarkness]

But... uhhh, your flag is inactive due to the need of net +1 opposition or support. Currently it's net +1 opposition from DTs, with ]as the time this post made] two DT oppose it and only one DT [the flag creator] support it, resulting in -1 DT support. You'll need 2 more DT support.

Is this a bug then?  Shouldn't a flag show the same even if I have a custom trust?

Not exactly a bug, rather the complexity of DT system kicking in.

In the eye of the flag raiser, they're the DT0, and thus your flag, as it is newbie flag, only require your own DT support to be active, while for others, it still need >1 support/opposition to be active... I might be wrong though, since there are two DTs opposing it, and that brings one DT1 and one DT2 a nett two of DT opposition and one DT0 support.

Still, the flag is inactive:

[dragonvslinux]

I'm willing to remove my opposition if my assessment is inaccurate, as I'm willing to accept if I am wrong here. My intuition tells me otherwise though.

Understandable.  You were invited to this recently and were not witness to the perverted lies she wrote before.    You are reasonable but not knowledgeable on the subject.  

Brilliant. I also opposed the inactive flags on your account, as a sign of good faith. This one with only 1 DT member opposing could of sent you over the edge if someone went off the rails.

Edit: You might also want to oppose it yourself 

[JustBeKause]

@dragon your not making any sense, and you've earned a merit for your lack of sense, from someone who merits senseless posts.

Didn't you have a whole argument with Og over cultist trust call-to-action posts? And here you are shouting ~Vod...

Weren't you the one who unbiasedley documented Vod/Og trust power over time, due to the Vod is liar thread??

The fuck is going on?

Bitcoingirl is claiming ripoffreport link is "truthful". But the flag isnt warranted?

While all of DT neg feedbacks off "character" instead of trade risk...then turns around and complain each other dont use trust correctly.

I know you're tired of Vod pedo drama og drama all of it. But its not personal drama. Vod calling out Og scams on this forum is not personal.

[Vod]

Not exactly a bug, rather the complexity of DT system kicking in.

I'd say a bug since a flag is not personal opinion - it's shown to every newbie regardless of who they trust, right?    It should show the same to me so I am not given false info.  I get enough of that from my own computer.  I'd like to report it in Meta but that would lead to more drama, so I will just PM Theymos.  Edit:  He responded and said it was by design. 

This one with only 1 DT member opposing could of sent you over the edge if someone went off the rails.

Are you saying one new DT member supporting could make this active?  


I guess I'll have to learn about flags, but my flag accusation is correct regardless if I'm confused about the flag support.  Edit:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5213618.msg66787732#msg66787732

------------------------------------------------------

So I guess I have to promote the flag by simply listing the URL each time she posts another perverted lie, and will not engage in drama.   This flag action would never had been needed if BG (and OG) hadn't told a perverted lie to Kazkaz27 in the first place, leading him to RL consequences.  Just over two weeks until legal questioning under oath - can you guys stop with your perverted imagination until you learn the actual truth?

[dragonvslinux]

And here you are shouting ~Vod...

I'm not shouting ~Vod. There is no formatting emphasis to support that theory either. It's a reference point to the reason I don't trust their feedback anymore. If I was calling for them to be removed, I would of pinged their sponsors. I did not.

Weren't you the one who unbiasedley documented Vod/Og trust power over time, due to the Vod is liar thread??

Yeh I should update that topic, a lot's changed. It'd be interesting to see how it statistically occurred. I need to dig out some old folders first though in order to locate the original spreadsheet.

The fuck is going on?

I'm opposing an egregious flag, not much else. I also have a history of doing that, so this should be nothing new. You're otherwise getting ahead of yourself as I'm not here to support BitcoinGirl.Club, Vod, or OG.

This one with only 1 DT member opposing could of sent you over the edge if someone went off the rails.

Are you saying one new DT member supporting could make this active?  

It wasn't active after nutildah opposed after all as you assumed (and therefore I did too), per the logs: https://bpip.org/flag.aspx?id=3531 (yup, should of checked that first).
So in hindsight, I didn't make this flag inactive at all. All I did was agree with another DT member that it shouldn't be active, along with making it so it's 2 DT members supporting away from becoming active.

So I guess I have to promote the flag by simply listing the URL each time she posts another perverted lie, and will not engage in drama.

It would be excellent if you could do so without drama.

[Vod]

This one with only 1 DT member opposing could of sent you over the edge if someone went off the rails.

Are you saying one new DT member supporting could make this active?  

It wasn't active after nutildah opposed after all

I was talking about the flag I quoted.  

Yeh I should update that topic, a lot's changed. It'd be interesting to see how it statistically occurred. I need to dig out some old folders first though in order to locate the original spreadsheet.

I've been asking for that for years.

[dragonvslinux]

Yeh I should update that topic, a lot's changed. It'd be interesting to see how it statistically occurred. I need to dig out some old folders first though in order to locate the original spreadsheet.

I've been asking that for years.  It would be excellent if you could do so without drama.

Yeh fair enough, nothing personal either. I've been largely inactive since 2022, I don't think a lot happened between 2020 and 2022 trust change wise, but only the data will confirm that theory.

I will also commit to not updating the topic and introducing any drama, you have my word. I only hope you can do the same with your crusade.

[Vod]

I will also commit to not updating the topic and introducing any drama, you have my word. I only hope you can do the same with your crusade.

No crusade sir, I even edited something you quoted to cool down.   I have a perplexity.al link that has been fed with all the documents given to the court in Vod vs OgNasty.    It's eye opening, no matter whose side you are on.   I hope you feel the need to learn about the flag you opposed.  

I don't think a lot happened between 2020 and 2022 trust change wise, but only the data will confirm that theory.

  That's about when the business relationship Og and I had for years fell apart, and all the perverted accusations started.   I think you're wrong.  

Edit:   Dragon had a valid point about trust and it was my ignorance so I've removed the ~distrust I had.   I've always had positive feedback on his profile because he's able to maintain without escalation.

[JollyGood]

I find it rather odd that an account that had been posting mostly sporadically for a very long time suddenly decided to become very active in order to start posting in (what can be deemed as) defence of an account that not many members are interested in defending. It is rather odd, right?

Keeping that aside, the fact remains there are rules. It might be the case that there is leniency to the degree many members would find unacceptable. We all have to operate within the rules though with consensus it might be possible to modify them if there is a strong desire in the community.

There is a big problem with users like that since no group in power wants to completely get rid of them swiftly, instead good members have to tolerate various levels of abuse. Only if the member in question reaches a crazy-level behavior and starts strongly breaking the forum rules does something actually happen, the level of leniency here is incredible and it is a case example that can be used as an argument against leniency in anything.

[Vod]

BitcoinGirl.club should keep her perverted fantasies on the community she gets them from.   She should not be posting those types of hopes and dreams on a bitcoin forum.  :/