BITCOINTALK STAFF QUIETLY BANS PEOPLE FOR SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THEM

[mnmShadyBTC]

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.

[1714717107]

1714717107

[1714717107]

1714717107

[r3wt]

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.

[QuestionAuthority]

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]

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?

[QuestionAuthority]

Trust No One

[r3wt]

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.

[SaltySpitoon]

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]

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

[r3wt]

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).

[mnmShadyBTC]

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.

[r3wt]

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

[HELP.org]

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.

[r3wt]

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.  

[Quickseller]

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 🏰]

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

[QuestionAuthority]

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

Says the guy with this feedback rating:

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

[HELP.org]

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.  

it is called being an idiot-savant.

[Furio]

You guys realize the trust system is completely meaningless, right?

So long as you can buy and sell accounts, you can get trust that you didn't earn and use it to make trades with people who don't know they are trading with a bought account.

This is why account selling should be frowned upon and not openly endorsed.

True, use escrow from a trusted party and you'll be fine

[Lethn]

I rather be banned forever than secretly hated forever.

+1 Nothing worse than backstabbing assholes who pretend to be your friends.

[r3wt]

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

Nah bro, i received my negative feedback from iGS already. you little bitches just mad