Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2017, 05:04:56 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: BITCOINTALK STAFF QUIETLY BANS PEOPLE FOR SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THEM  (Read 7483 times)
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 06:57:51 PM
 #101



Aww, since the account was banned, I can't see the outbox.

It's no coincidence that Blazr has logged in to leave me negative feedback, now is it  Cheesy

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
1513055096
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513055096

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513055096
Reply with quote  #2

1513055096
Report to moderator
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
SaltySpitoon
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 07:57:37 PM
 #102

Well, to address a couple points here, first off, banning account selling is something that the Bitcointalk staff is not able to do. We can ban content (the example kiddy porn was used) because that is posted here, and we can delete the post and ban the poster. If you make 50 accounts on different tor nodes and then make a contact via pm or skype to sell the accounts, how exactly do you expect that we can stop that without spying through your pms and hacking your skype? By publicly allowing account selling, its not a surprise to anyone, so everyone has a bit of suspicion in them when dealing with someone. If we said we banned Account selling, then the majority of people who knew how to get around the system would be able to do more damage to unsuspecting people.

As far as the trust system goes, it is not flawless, people need to stop taking it as definitive proof of trust. It is essentially ebay feedback, past history does not guarantee future trustworthiness. However! Something that everyone seems to forget, is that your account and its history has financial value, and so does your trust. If I wanted to sell my account (I'm not going to) I would get a pretty hefty offer. My account valuation would be based on account age, past actions, future opportunities with my name, and my trust, plus various other things. A person can calculate how much money they can trust me worth, based on similar factors. If I have 50 positive feedback, people trusting me with 1 BTC, that doesn't magically mean I'm trustworthy with 50 BTC, perhaps 5 BTC, based on various calculations. If the valuation of what I'd sell my account for is based on my trust value + other factors, it doesn't make economical sense for someone to buy my account for 20+ BTC (the combination of financial factors) and then to scam for just the value of my trust. Now of course that isn't foolproof, but its a heavy incentive not to buy trust heavy accounts and scam with them. Buying accounts with the intention to scam is frankly a gamble. If you get caught after paying a hefty sum for a valuable account, you are out a bunch of money. Perhaps it is more valuable to play it straight and sign up for sig campaigns, invest in business opportunities, etc.

Anyway, I'm not justifying account selling, I'm not in denial, and sure it can be used to scam, but if you actually do the math, sometimes there can be legit reasons to buy accounts. But, thats all moot anyway, because we can't stop it either way.

As far as the censorship goes, only global moderators or admins can ban people. "Silent bans" tend to happen in full view of all of the moderators by public request of a moderator who can't ban someone personally. This isn't a decentralized forum, if you want a decentralized forum, make one.

And really, by the way, it is a very very common occurrence for people to cry censorship, try to make a martyr out of themselves by declaring that they will be banned for their views, and then get themselves banned for spamming/completely unrelated reasons to prove a point. There is no rule that says you can't voice your outrage at policies here, and as long as you aren't being overly abusive, you are welcome to criticize everything we do. Just put your complaints in the right sections, and it would be very well appreciated if you are actually looking for an answer / a change rather than just trying to pick a fight to prove a point.
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:03:56 PM
 #103

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
October 12, 2014, 08:09:15 PM
 #104

Well, to address a couple points here, first off, banning account selling is something that the Bitcointalk staff is not able to do. We can ban content (the example kiddy porn was used) because that is posted here, and we can delete the post and ban the poster. If you make 50 accounts on different tor nodes and then make a contact via pm or skype to sell the accounts, how exactly do you expect that we can stop that without spying through your pms and hacking your skype? By publicly allowing account selling, its not a surprise to anyone, so everyone has a bit of suspicion in them when dealing with someone. If we said we banned Account selling, then the majority of people who knew how to get around the system would be able to do more damage to unsuspecting people.



Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
mnmShadyBTC
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 152


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:22:34 PM
 #105

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.
If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
PRIMEDICE
The Premier Bitcoin Gambling Experience - PRIMEDICE 3 HAS LAUNCHED @PrimeDice
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:28:18 PM
 #106

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.
If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

You've been here 3 months, so you think your opinion holds more weight than mine? i have busted hero members red handed and they are still in the default trust.

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:32:08 PM
 #107

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.
If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

It's always best to use the X-Files theory of trade on this forum.

mnmShadyBTC
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 152


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:36:05 PM
 #108

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.
If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

You've been here 3 months, so you think your opinion holds more weight than mine? i have busted hero members red handed and they are still in the default trust.
The length of time that I have been here does not matter. What matters is facts. Your attitude towards newer members is one additional reason why people wish to buy accounts as newer members will not get respect from people like you despite them having a valid point.

The fact that the account was a hero is not relevant. Unless you can provide proof of wrongdoing then the account will be unaffected. It is also possible that the person who gave trust to the accused was not made aware of the accusation so if they do not know to remove the trust they will not.

EDIT:
SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.
If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

It's always best to use the X-Files theory of trade on this forum.
Do you mean that the truth is out there?

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
PRIMEDICE
The Premier Bitcoin Gambling Experience - PRIMEDICE 3 HAS LAUNCHED @PrimeDice
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:38:39 PM
 #109

Trust No One

r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:50:37 PM
 #110

Your argument falls flat, because i provided plenty of proof in the matter which i am referencing, without going into much detail. I have pm logs and screenshots, and i was extorted into removing them, by tactics ranging from death threats, to sending drugs to my house from silk road, to opening a credit card in my name.

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
SaltySpitoon
Global Moderator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778


Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 08:50:54 PM
 #111

Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

The reason you dont see account selling at other forums, is because their demographic is different. This isn't the hello kitty fansite forum. We cater to the bitcoin community, all of which knows basic anonymity measures and know how to bypass any measures that we could possibly put in place. Why create laws if we can't enforce them, it just makes us look like jackasses.

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.

How people regard others on the default trust list is up to psychology. I can't tell people how to use the forum's trust system. Thats really a social issue. I've seen plenty of people on the default trust list get called out for being a scammer, and they were given no special treatment by the community. Pirate@40 was around before the trust system, and the amount of people cheering for him rather than pointing out their suspicions was completely disproportionate, even after he started to slip. Most of the people on the default trust list have in the past done something for the community, whether that be to providing a "trusted" service or product, its understandable that no one wants the good guys to become scammers, but sometimes it happens. I really don't think there is a huge issue with the forum's trust system. If you have an idea on how to fix it, we are all ears.

That being said, I'm not a trust system shill, I've never been a huge fan of it, but I understand its uses. If you want someone off of the trust system, you have to prove it to the people that added them. I've seen plenty of people removed. Actually how the system works is pretty interesting. If I add someone to the default trust list under me, its a blow to my reputation if they do something, giving me incentive to only add those that I truly trust. And if someone that I trust messes up, I will want to know immediately so I can remove them and stop the damage to my own reputation.
mnmShadyBTC
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 152


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 09:00:20 PM
 #112

Your argument falls flat, because i provided plenty of proof in the matter which i am referencing, without going into much detail. I have pm logs and screenshots, and i was extorted into removing them, by tactics ranging from death threats, to sending drugs to my house from silk road, to opening a credit card in my name.
This sounds like an appropriate situation that should have been reported to the police. If someone is making death threats to you then, even if not credible they are almost always investigated by the police/FBI. If this really is true (I have my doubts) then an account's level of green trust does not matter as there would almost certainly be evidence of that person's actions being linked to his identity.  

EDIT: Ironically it looks like you have just been discovered that you scammed today via a scamcoins

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
PRIMEDICE
The Premier Bitcoin Gambling Experience - PRIMEDICE 3 HAS LAUNCHED @PrimeDice
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 09:16:51 PM
 #113

EDIT: Ironically it looks like you have just been discovered that you scammed today via a scamcoins

Lol, it's an attempt to discredit me by abusing the trust system(as is your post, obviously).

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
mnmShadyBTC
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 152


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 09:28:50 PM
 #114

EDIT: Ironically it looks like you have just been discovered that you scammed today via a scamcoins

Lol, it's an attempt to discredit me by abusing the trust system(as is your post, obviously).
So you scammed people who invested in your altcoin, someone was made aware of it and pointed it out. You consider that to be an abuse of the trust system?

The purpose of default trust is to have trustworthy people point out other trustworthy people and untrustworthy people so others have somewhat of an idea as to who to trust. Since someone who is trustworthy pointed out that you are not (and that you scammed) then I now know not to trust you with my money (not that I would ever invest in an altcoin either way).

I personally think that anyone who tries to create a altcoin and profit off of it automatically deserves negative trust so with or without your red trust I would not trust you.

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
PRIMEDICE
The Premier Bitcoin Gambling Experience - PRIMEDICE 3 HAS LAUNCHED @PrimeDice
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 09:41:12 PM
 #115

Chess is a game requiring patience, but its no fun when your opponent only knows how to play checkers.

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
HELP.org
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 508



View Profile WWW
October 12, 2014, 09:43:55 PM
 #116

Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

The reason you dont see account selling at other forums, is because their demographic is different. This isn't the hello kitty fansite forum. We cater to the bitcoin community, all of which knows basic anonymity measures and know how to bypass any measures that we could possibly put in place. Why create laws if we can't enforce them, it just makes us look like jackasses.


More hyperbole.  You either have a hello Kitty forum or you have a Bitcoin forum.  You are right about the demographics part, most other forums are run by responsible adults and this one is run by dumb kids and delusional people.

Certified Bitcoin Professional
Bicoin.me - Bitcoin.me!
r3wt
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


always the student, never the master.


View Profile
October 12, 2014, 09:48:18 PM
 #117

Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

The reason you dont see account selling at other forums, is because their demographic is different. This isn't the hello kitty fansite forum. We cater to the bitcoin community, all of which knows basic anonymity measures and know how to bypass any measures that we could possibly put in place. Why create laws if we can't enforce them, it just makes us look like jackasses.


More hyperbole.  You either have a hello Kitty forum or you have a Bitcoin forum.  You are right about the demographics part, most other forums are run by responsible adults and this one is run by dumb kids and delusional people.
they clearly know what they are doing though, so perhaps they are not dumb or delusional at all.  Grin

My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
Quickseller
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260

#PathOfTotality


View Profile WWW
October 12, 2014, 09:50:05 PM
 #118

Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

The reason you dont see account selling at other forums, is because their demographic is different. This isn't the hello kitty fansite forum. We cater to the bitcoin community, all of which knows basic anonymity measures and know how to bypass any measures that we could possibly put in place. Why create laws if we can't enforce them, it just makes us look like jackasses.


More hyperbole.  You either have a hello Kitty forum or you have a Bitcoin forum.  You are right about the demographics part, most other forums are run by responsible adults and this one is run by dumb kids and delusional people.
You don't see account trading at other forums because accounts at other forums do not have value. Accounts on this forum do.

TradeFortress
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
October 13, 2014, 12:46:06 PM
 #119

Haha r3wt, I love how Blazr came back and just left you negative feedback. But you do deserve negative feedback for a variety of things you've done, or failed to do.

Any thoughts on if they're behind the phishing sprees a month or so ago? Email me if you do Smiley
QuestionAuthority
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722


You lead and I'll watch you walk away.


View Profile
October 13, 2014, 03:14:37 PM
 #120

Haha r3wt, I love how Blazr came back and just left you negative feedback. But you do deserve negative feedback for a variety of things you've done, or failed to do.

Any thoughts on if they're behind the phishing sprees a month or so ago? Email me if you do Smiley

Says the guy with this feedback rating:

Trust:   -1121: -26 / +29(29)
Warning: Trade with extreme caution!

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!