Remove Vod from DefaultTrust

[errtest]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=30747

Have a look at the sent feedback. As you can see, Vod is leaving a lot of feedback on suspected scammers BEFORE they scam.

The problem is that Vod has left so many people unsubstantiated negative feedback that his feedback isn't useful anymore. none of the feedback good or bad he has left are people who he has traded with in anyway. Anytime I see his feedback I have to ignore it and I know I'm not the only one who does that too.

He also never leaves negative trust to users who are trusted, even if they are confirmed to be scammers. For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

How do you guys feel about this practice? I think that trust feedback should be "mostly" reserved for reporting people who have actually scammed, not accusing unconfirmed ones. Perhaps a scam accusation thread is more suitable for that so that the accused has the ability to challenge the accusation.

I notice Vod is on the trustlist of BadBear and Tomatocage, I hope you guys reconsider and remove him. His feedback will still show up but it won't be "Trusted", I don't think you can call unsubstantiated accusations "Trusted Feedback" .

[Shogen]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=30747

Have a look at the sent feedback. As you can see, Vod is leaving a lot of feedback on suspected scammers BEFORE they scam.

The problem is that Vod has left so many people unsubstantiated negative feedback that his feedback isn't useful anymore. none of the feedback good or bad he has left are people who he has traded with in anyway. Anytime I see his feedback I have to ignore it and I know I'm not the only one who does that too.

As I can see from the page, Vod gave negative trust to new accounts asking for loans without collateral.

IMHO, this kind of warnings is very helpful to newbies to stay away from potential scams, and I think Vod has been doing a pretty good job.

[BitCoinDream]

Lately, I can see, there are lots of allegations coming about Vod's feedback. There is also a doxing thread on Vod from a disgruntled user. I just wonder, can there be a clear declaration on this section saying "Newbies asking for loan without collateral will be left with -ve feedback without any second chance" ? Then it would probably be easier to defend Vod from a more logical angle.

[koshgel]

This request coming from someone with a scammer tag.

Vod mainly patrols the lending board and prevents loans being given out without collateral. On a board prevalent with scammers you aren't going to garner sympathy from the community about the negative trust he leaves. It's most likely deserved.

[Lauda]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=30747

Have a look at the sent feedback. As you can see, Vod is leaving a lot of feedback on suspected scammers BEFORE they scam.

The problem is that Vod has left so many people unsubstantiated negative feedback that his feedback isn't useful anymore. none of the feedback good or bad he has left are people who he has traded with in anyway. Anytime I see his feedback I have to ignore it and I know I'm not the only one who does that too.

As I can see from the page, Vod gave negative trust to new accounts asking for loans without collateral.

IMHO, this kind of warnings is very helpful to newbies to stay away from potential scams, and I think Vod has been doing a pretty good job.

The OP is a Newbie, no wonder he's complaining.
OP stop trying to pull a scam.

[jbrnt]

I strongly agree that no loans should be given out to newbies without collateral, but I do not think they deserve negative trust. I think a big red scammer warning inside the thread will do nicely. "Destroying" their accounts is a bit over the top.

Anyhow, he should remain on the default trust list.

[paceta]

Whats about to just look the lending section to newbies ?!

[Vod]

For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

Whoops - wasn't aware of that.  That scammer has been removed.

[MakeBelieve]

I agree that if a user is intending to scam or looks like he could scam because he is not providing collateral it should deserve negative trust I have no problem with what vod is doing.

[fonenumba]

I would say that VOD stops the scams from happening before they happen. This prevents bitcoin from getting a bad name and being associated with even more scams then it already is.

[goozman96]

I think that he should remain on the default list. He's doing God's work by hunting down scammers. If anything, we need to add more people to the default list.

[galbros]

For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

Whoops - wasn't aware of that.  That scammer has been removed.

Vod, thanks.  So glad you got rid of that TF rating as clearly there were a lot of unresolved issues with what went down with some of his activities.  Not saying he was a scammer, but clearly wasn't a good custodian of coins given the inputs.io "hack".

On to OP, you can always just take the default trust out of your trust network.  I've done that and find life is much better, of course, I don't do a lot of marketplace transactions.

[BTCreward]

For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

Whoops - wasn't aware of that.  That scammer has been removed.

Either way the TF has over 400 negative trust and it should be obvious that he is not trustworthy.

[Vod]

For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

Whoops - wasn't aware of that.  That scammer has been removed.

Either way the TF has over 400 negative trust and it should be obvious that he is not trustworthy.

+1.  If you make a deal with someone with that trust, no matter what they post, you deserve to lose your money.

[shockinglyugly]

For example, notice how Vod STILL has positive trust for TradeFortress. You might remember TF was also in the trustlist which is probably why Vod didn't tag him, because TF could have retaliated and ruined his feedback.

Whoops - wasn't aware of that.  That scammer has been removed.

Either way the TF has over 400 negative trust and it should be obvious that he is not trustworthy.

+1.  If you make a deal with someone with that trust, no matter what they post, you deserve to lose your money.

If you use escrow and it would not be possible for the TF account to scam the escrow then it should be safe.

[evershawn]

Vod does NOT just give new members negative feedback that haven't scammed anyone, he did this to me too. I am a full member and been around for a while. He gave me feedback completely out of anger / dislike of something I had to say that was of a personal nature. His basis for the negative feedback was that I was removing questions / not answering questions in a moderated thread I had, which is simply NOT true at all. I had never removed any questions or avoided answering any. So, he lied and when he was questioned about it, it further infuriated him and he has since made the feedback sound worse and worse, trying to ensure that no one will do business with me or deal with me.

This is one hot head with a short fuze and a massive ego that has ZERO respect for the trust system or other full members of this site. If you fart in the guys direction he's going to leave you a negative saying you tried scamming someone. To this day he's never said what I removed or what question I've never answered

Please see my thread about him here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=704289.msg7971391#msg7971391 and here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702774.40

[Testing123]

His basis for the negative feedback was that I was removing questions / not answering questions in a moderated thread I had, which is simply NOT true at all. I had never removed any questions or avoided answering any. So, he lied and when he was questioned about it, it further infuriated him and he has since made the feedback sound worse and worse, trying to ensure that no one will do business with me or deal with me.

And I found Vod's response in one of the your linked threads:

You can click on the "Reference" link in the negative trust I left for him.  He is asking for 700btc and deleting questions he doesn't like.

He deleted several questions that were asked of him.  Unfortunately, bitcointa.lk wasn't copying the thread. 

Google cache only has his original post:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702233.0

This entire thing has come down to the scammer denying he deleted any posts.

It seems there is no way to prove either side's claim, unless theymos spend some time to check the deleted posts in that thread...

[evershawn]

His basis for the negative feedback was that I was removing questions / not answering questions in a moderated thread I had, which is simply NOT true at all. I had never removed any questions or avoided answering any. So, he lied and when he was questioned about it, it further infuriated him and he has since made the feedback sound worse and worse, trying to ensure that no one will do business with me or deal with me.

And I found Vod's response in one of the your linked threads:

You can click on the "Reference" link in the negative trust I left for him.  He is asking for 700btc and deleting questions he doesn't like.

He deleted several questions that were asked of him.  Unfortunately, bitcointa.lk wasn't copying the thread. 

Google cache only has his original post:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702233.0

This entire thing has come down to the scammer denying he deleted any posts.

It seems there is no way to prove either side's claim, unless theymos spend some time to check the deleted posts in that thread...

I deleted a thread that was not moderated to move to one that was. I reposted the questions in the new thread (including Vod's) pertaining to business and not the troll posts that had nothing to do with it. People making one word posts like "+" or coming in just saying "SCAMMER" or some stupid BS like that. Anyone that posted a legitimate question I was happy to answer and respond to, just didn't want my topic getting derailed by trolls (i'm sure anyone that's posting something serious can sympathize because there's a ton of trolls on the forum).

If he claims I deleted a real question and not just troll posts, he should be able to easily just say what question that was. In the original thread, I was unable to delete anything other than my own posts, so obviously that did not take place there. In the second moderated version, it got derailed so quickly by Vod's negative rating (within a few minutes of creating it), there was not even a chance for that to get off the ground, so I wasn't on any deleting spree there either. I in fact did not even delete the battle back and forth between Vod and I about it (which should be deleted from it).

It's very simple really, all he has to do is say what question I'm allegedly avoiding because I have NOTHING to hide and I'm not avoiding anything other than trolls trying to derail my topic. If he's willing to leave me a negative stating I was trying to scam by deleting important questions, just simply restate the important questions... anywhere... in any unmoderated thread that I cannot delete... why won't he do that, it's not hard..?

[Vod]

I have NOTHING to hide and I'm not avoiding anything other than trolls trying to derail my topic.

Is that why you deleted your name and website from your profile?  Because you have nothing to hide?   

I don't remember what questions you deleted.  Why don't you post the questions you deleted and the reasons you deleted them?

[evershawn]

I have NOTHING to hide and I'm not avoiding anything other than trolls trying to derail my topic.

Is that why you deleted your name and website from your profile?  Because you have nothing to hide?  

I don't remember what questions you deleted.  Why don't you post the questions you deleted and the reasons you deleted them?

I just did say what I deleted in the above post, that's the only thing that took place. I wasn't hiding anything.

As for why I deleted my website from my sig, I already stated that too, it was a dead site that I made a while back that no longer exists. It was just a vbulletin forum, go look it up on archive.org - ccxe.org is the domain. Nothing shady there.

I deleted personal information from my profile at the same time I did that, I didn't realize it was public and I don't want it to be (like my personal skype, ect), especially while I have a public battle going on with you. What's that got to do with it? You're really getting off topic and now ridiculing me for what information I keep on my profile in the forum? Not even false information, just not displaying it. Sounds like you're getting desperate now for something to use against me.

 I've told people who I am in great detail "trustworthy people that I don't mind having it". Why don't you ask Tomatocage? Just because I don't want every single troll on the planet to have my personal contact information doesn't make me a scammer.

Do you give out all of your personal information in your profile? No, you don't. Please stop with your hypocritical nonsense. You even changed your user name 'mlawrence', to try to hide your identity when you started harassing people.

Bottom line is this:

I don't remember what questions you deleted

Ok, then please remove your negative feedback until you remember something that actually took place.