Bitcoin Forum
April 23, 2018, 12:47:48 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.0  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Staff Hypocrisy and Selective Enforcement of Rules  (Read 6535 times)
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2478
Merit: 1006


Welcome to Bitcoin Stalk


View Profile
April 24, 2015, 12:20:48 PM
 #61

I ain't an anti-TECSHARE person. I am only telling what I understood/saw.

OP

1,2,3,4,5 & 6: Ok.
7: I agree with what he mentioned but a neutral might be better. However, considering he has changed to neutral earlier and it was reverted because you continued, I think negative is ok.

There are also a plethora of other instances where he attempted to silence others for speaking out against him by leaving negative ratings that he was later forced to remove under public pressure such as iCEBREAKER and Takagari, each time claiming to have learned his lesson and seeing the error in his ways only to do it again about a month later to some one else.

Takagari's was changed to neutral at the same yours waa changed too.
iCEBREAKER's was removed after he understood it wasn't hacked. A neutral was best.

In addition to this, he has now unilaterally decided he has to power to negative rate anyone selling microsoft keys because he claims they are all illegal and stolen (some how he knows this for every user as if by magic) . The forum rules state that if a transaction is legal in the country of origin as well as the trading partner's country IT IS ALLOWED ON THE FORUM. If it was illegal THE ADMINS/MOD WOULD HAVE REMOVED THEM THEMSELVES.

If you have followed recent Microsoft threads, you can see almost all of them turned into liars and scammers. I don't think a liar can be trusted. Of course, he left negative feedback on MS key sellers because of his softcorner towards MS but what he said is true.

This is just another power grab by Vod, giving himself more self proclaimed authority to dictate to this entire forum to do things his way OR ELSE. Vod is the kind of obsessive compulsive, control hungry, vindictive, egotistical, sociopath that should NEVER be in any position of power, because no matter what authority he has he will abuse it to feed his deficient feelings of self worth, and will lash out at anyone who hurts his feelies.

If he is what you said, he would have been removed from trust list or will be removed soon.

IMHO I don't think he is, so I think he will stay.

Look how cute you are crafting so many excuses for your pal.

7: I agree with what he mentioned but a neutral might be better. However, considering he has changed to neutral earlier and it was reverted because you continued, I think negative is ok.

Just because people do not agree with my conclusions does not make me a liar. What a childish way to look at the world. By that standard you are a liar because I don't agree with you calling me a liar and it would be acceptable for me to negative rate you. The statements I made are a matter of debate. Declaring them untrue doesn't magically make them not true or a lie.

It was changed to a neutral after lots of public pressure. I called him out later on his abusive behavior regarding MSDN key sellers, as a direct result he changed the rating again back to a negative knowing people would not bother to look a second time. Proof is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10890378#msg10890378

"Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." This is the standard for leaving a negative rating. Saying something that upsets Vod is not equivalent to scamming.

Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to be critical of anyone if they call me a liar and they are on the default trust list? Is that what you mean by "because you continued"? Since when is it acceptable to negative rate people from the position of the default trust list because you don't like what people are saying? It is amazing how much free speech is protected around here... until some one says some thing one of their buddies don't like. No matter how many BS excuses come out of Vod's mouth, he left me a negative rating for pointing out his abusive behavior in an attempt to intimidate me into silence, something other users were removed from the default trust list for for doing ONCE, he however has done it over and over again to many people.

The trust system has failed and is nothing more than a way to write off new users as "socks" or "scammers" and extort people who have built up reputations into silence from a centralized position of power.


BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES IN AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CHILL EFFECT AND PERMANENTLY REMOVE ME AND OTHERS FROM THIS FORUM AS RETALIATION FOR SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THEIR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR, AND THAT OF THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUES.
1524487668
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524487668

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524487668
Reply with quote  #2

1524487668
Report to moderator
1524487668
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524487668

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524487668
Reply with quote  #2

1524487668
Report to moderator
1524487668
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524487668

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524487668
Reply with quote  #2

1524487668
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1524487668
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524487668

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524487668
Reply with quote  #2

1524487668
Report to moderator
1524487668
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1524487668

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1524487668
Reply with quote  #2

1524487668
Report to moderator
Muhammed Zakir
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560
Merit: 504


I prefer Zakir over Muhammed when mentioning me!


View Profile WWW
April 24, 2015, 12:46:03 PM
 #62

I ain't an anti-TECSHARE person. I am only telling what I understood/saw.

OP

1,2,3,4,5 & 6: Ok.
7: I agree with what he mentioned but a neutral might be better. However, considering he has changed to neutral earlier and it was reverted because you continued, I think negative is ok.

There are also a plethora of other instances where he attempted to silence others for speaking out against him by leaving negative ratings that he was later forced to remove under public pressure such as iCEBREAKER and Takagari, each time claiming to have learned his lesson and seeing the error in his ways only to do it again about a month later to some one else.

Takagari's was changed to neutral at the same yours waa changed too.
iCEBREAKER's was removed after he understood it wasn't hacked. A neutral was best.

In addition to this, he has now unilaterally decided he has to power to negative rate anyone selling microsoft keys because he claims they are all illegal and stolen (some how he knows this for every user as if by magic) . The forum rules state that if a transaction is legal in the country of origin as well as the trading partner's country IT IS ALLOWED ON THE FORUM. If it was illegal THE ADMINS/MOD WOULD HAVE REMOVED THEM THEMSELVES.

If you have followed recent Microsoft threads, you can see almost all of them turned into liars and scammers. I don't think a liar can be trusted. Of course, he left negative feedback on MS key sellers because of his softcorner towards MS but what he said is true.

This is just another power grab by Vod, giving himself more self proclaimed authority to dictate to this entire forum to do things his way OR ELSE. Vod is the kind of obsessive compulsive, control hungry, vindictive, egotistical, sociopath that should NEVER be in any position of power, because no matter what authority he has he will abuse it to feed his deficient feelings of self worth, and will lash out at anyone who hurts his feelies.

If he is what you said, he would have been removed from trust list or will be removed soon.

IMHO I don't think he is, so I think he will stay.

Look how cute you are crafting so many excuses for your pal.

We aren't pals. I barely know him in this forum. Whoever agrees with Vod is his pal! Interesting...

7: I agree with what he mentioned but a neutral might be better. However, considering he has changed to neutral earlier and it was reverted because you continued, I think negative is ok.

Just because people do not agree with my conclusions does not make me a liar. What a childish way to look at the world. By that standard you are a liar because I don't agree with you calling me a liar and it would be acceptable for me to negative rate you. The statements I made are a matter of debate. Declaring them untrue doesn't magically make them not true or a lie.

Uh! I am sorry. Some conclusions can be wrong. You should investigate more before spreading disinformation.

I don't even know how could this be a debatable topic where you concluded. I am hearing for first time making a debate on a matter after concluding it.

Quote
Signature:
BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES AND IGNORE CLEAR INSTANCES OF ABUSE TO PROTECT THOSE WITHIN THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUE
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0;all

It was changed to a neutral after lots of public pressure. I called him out later on his abusive behavior regarding MSDN key sellers, as a direct result he changed the rating again back to a negative knowing people would not bother to look a second time. Proof is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10890378#msg10890378

"Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." This is the standard for leaving a negative rating. Saying something that upsets Vod is not equivalent to scamming.

Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to be critical of anyone if they call me a liar and they are on the default trust list? Is that what you mean by "because you continued"? Since when is it acceptable to negative rate people from the position of the default trust list because you don't like what people are saying? It is amazing how much free speech is protected around here... until some one says some thing one of their buddies don't like. No matter how many BS excuses come out of Vod's mouth, he left me a negative rating for pointing out his abusive behavior in an attempt to intimidate me into silence, something other users were removed from the default trust list for for doing ONCE, he however has done it over and over again to many people.

The trust system has failed and is nothing more than a way to write off new users as "socks" or "scammers" and extort people who have built up reputations into silence from a centralized position of power.

Don't want to copy-paste same thing here, so quoting.

2) Just because people do not agree with my conclusions does not make me a liar. What a childish way to look at the world. By that standard you are a liar because I don't agree with you calling me a liar and it would be acceptable for me to negative rate you. SaltySpitoon is not the god of Bitcointalk. He does not speak for everyone even if he had the ability to know everything. His opinion does not negate my opinion and magically some how make it a lie. Furthermore Saltyspitoon is just a mod, he has very little power to do anything on the forum, so he can hardly speak for higher level staff either. The statements I made are a matter of debate. Declaring them untrue doesn't magically make them not true or a lie.

3) It was changed to a neutral after lots of public pressure. I called him out later on his abusive behavior regarding MSDN key sellers, as a direct result he changed the rating again back to a negative knowing people would not bother to look a second time. Proof is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10890378#msg10890378

2) You said staff is protecting Vod and even created a thread about staff's selective enforcement conspiracy things. How can we agree with this conclusion? How can theymos benefits from these conspiracies? Don't tell me it's money because he can earned more and there is no money involved in these feedback. Your words are false. Furthermore, how are staffs protecting Vod when he is in trust list of Tomatocage.
 I am hoping you are joking about SaltySpitoon. He is a Global Moderator. There is no "higher" staff than Global Moderator. He has more than "very little" power. SaltySpitoon is a neutral diplomat. I haven't seen him making a biased statement/opinion. Furthermore, it wasn't an opinion, it was a statement.
 "Matter of debate"? You said a false things without even discussing. Obviously, the post you made against staff is not in a "discussing" or "debating" style, it is made on your feelings and your conclusion. So whatever you conclude aren't false? You are spreading disinformation but I am wishing it to be a misinformation. Hope this wish can be fulfilled.

3) I looked meaning of "abusive" but it isn't fitting here. According to *your version* of abuse, aren't you being an abuser? You started this anti-Vod war when you were removed from default trust list. Till that day, staffs are ok & DefaultTrust is ok. From that day forth, DefaultTrust is bad.

Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to be critical of anyone if they call me a liar? Is that what you mean by "you continued what you did earlier"? Since when is it acceptable to negative rate people from the position of the default trust list because you don't like what people are saying?

You can if you aren't telling a lie. Partial yes. It is still not allowed.

Edit: TECSHARE has made some changes. So replying.

-snip-

Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to be critical of anyone if they call me a liar and they are on the default trust list? Is that what you mean by "you continued what you did earlier"? Since when is it acceptable to negative rate people from the position of the default trust list because you don't like what people are saying? It is amazing how much free speech is protected around here... until some one says some thing one of their buddies don't like. No matter how many BS excuses come out of Vod's mouth, he left me a negative rating for pointing out his abusive behavior in an attempt to intimidate me into silence, something other users were removed from the default trust list for for doing ONCE, he however has done it over and over again to many people.

The trust system has failed and is nothing more than a way to write off new users as "socks" or "scammers" and extort people who have built up reputations into silence from a centralized position of power.

BS comes from everyones' mouth. It is clear "users who done once" is about you. Feedback you left and feedback Vod left starts from same end but reach at different place. There is slight difference in them.

"people who have built up reputations" is also you. Nobody silenced you for good things you did. You still can. Sadly, you are still going for makeup conspiracy theories. Bitcointalk is centralized and hence, trust system. This centralized power doesn't give Vod special status.

"Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." This is the standard for leaving a negative rating. Saying something that upsets Vod is not equivalent to scamming.

This isn't upsetting Vod, you are telling a lie about whole staffs which is bad for whole forum.

Quote from: TECSHARE's Trust Summary
Vod | 2015-03-26 | Constantly posts lies about me in an effort to have me removed from the default trust list. I am not protected by forum staff. Honest discussion is one thing, but he just posts BS with absolutely no basis.

Not trustworthy.

TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2478
Merit: 1006


Welcome to Bitcoin Stalk


View Profile
April 24, 2015, 07:36:35 PM
 #63


7: I agree with what he mentioned but a neutral might be better. However, considering he has changed to neutral earlier and it was reverted because you continued, I think negative is ok.

Uh! I am sorry. Some conclusions can be wrong. You should investigate more before spreading disinformation.

I don't even know how could this be a debatable topic where you concluded. I am hearing for first time making a debate on a matter after concluding it.


So you are telling me I am not allowed to form an opinion and state it without the approval of everyone on the default trust list? Just because you do not agree with my opinion does not make it a lie or "disinformation". Everyone loves free speech until some one says something that offends them personally then suddenly it needs limits. Leaving people negative trust from the default trust list for what some one said has NEVER been an acceptable use of the trust system.



2) You said staff is protecting Vod and even created a thread about staff's selective enforcement conspiracy things. How can we agree with this conclusion? How can theymos benefits from these conspiracies? Don't tell me it's money because he can earned more and there is no money involved in these feedback. Your words are false. Furthermore, how are staffs protecting Vod when he is in trust list of Tomatocage.
 I am hoping you are joking about SaltySpitoon. He is a Global Moderator. There is no "higher" staff than Global Moderator. He has more than "very little" power. SaltySpitoon is a neutral diplomat. I haven't seen him making a biased statement/opinion. Furthermore, it wasn't an opinion, it was a statement.
 "Matter of debate"? You said a false things without even discussing. Obviously, the post you made against staff is not in a "discussing" or "debating" style, it is made on your feelings and your conclusion. So whatever you conclude aren't false? You are spreading disinformation but I am wishing it to be a misinformation. Hope this wish can be fulfilled.

3) I looked meaning of "abusive" but it isn't fitting here. According to *your version* of abuse, aren't you being an abuser? You started this anti-Vod war when you were removed from default trust list. Till that day, staffs are ok & DefaultTrust is ok. From that day forth, DefaultTrust is bad.

There need not be some master conspiracy plot for this to happen, just plain old nepotism which happens everywhere every day. The word conspiracy is bandied about by people who disagree with me and wish to marginalize my valid points about the inconsistent application of rules regarding the default trust system, and the trust system in general.

So you get to decide if my statements are false or not? Tell me, on what evidence do you base this conclusion on? Oh that's right, its just your opinion. I guess you get to have an opinion, but my opinions have to be checked with you and Vod before I can have them.

Re: 3
If you are going to criticize me for something, at least bother to check the chain of events that started this instead of just demonstrating your ignorance of the situation as well as your bias.

This is the order of events you did not bother to actually look at, and instead blindly swallowing Vods bullshit narrative.

1. I was removed from the default trust list. There are no rules about using the trust list anywhere in the forum. I am not sure how I am supposed to know that the trust list is a broken system if there are no rules and the first time I break one I am removed. Additionally since there are no rules posted anywhere, all I have to go by is the example of other users on the default trust, such as Vod, and by that metric my rating seemed to be acceptable.

2. I made this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=853522.msg9495269#msg9495269
 In it I explain how the application of the rules are unwritten, unspoken, and not uniformly enforced. I used Vod's abusive ratings as an example of some one who repeatedly does the things I was accused of one time, but is not removed from the default trust. This is not a war on Vod, this is me being critical of his behavior as well as the inaction by staff while they played a close role in making sure I was removed from the trust list, even going so far as to create a new feature to make sure I was not again added to the default trust list by other level one users.

3. Vod did not like the fact that I was bringing attention to his abusive behavior and decided he would prove that he does not abuse his position on the default trust by leaving me a negative rating. I made a thread about it here, the first time I called for his removal from the default trust. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0
When confronted and asked to quote the supposed lie I made about him he waivers and delays for several pages, then decides on using a statement that I made in the thread about his negative rating that was made AFTER he left it.

4. After public pressure he changed the rating to a neutral, but after I dared to challenge his unilateral royal decree that MSDN keysellers are now not allowed to trade on the forum, he decided he would again use his position on the default trust in an attempt to again try to silence me from being critical of his actions. Here in a thread about the keysellers some one comments on his neutral rating for me and decides to make a show of the fact that he turned it into a negative. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg10890378#msg10890378
I don't know how he could make it any more clear he did this because I was critical of his actions, not for "lying" about him.



Are you trying to tell me that I am not allowed to be critical of anyone if they call me a liar? Is that what you mean by "you continued what you did earlier"? Since when is it acceptable to negative rate people from the position of the default trust list because you don't like what people are saying?


You can if you aren't telling a lie. Partial yes. It is still not allowed.

BS comes from everyones' mouth. It is clear is about you. Feedback you left and feedback Vod left starts from same end but reach at different place. There is slight difference in them.

"people who have built up reputations" is also you. Nobody silenced you for good things you did. You still can. Sadly, you are still going for makeup conspiracy theories. Bitcointalk is centralized and hence, trust system. This centralized power doesn't give Vod special status.

Just because you do not agree with my statements does not make me a liar. It is a pretty basic concept. You don't have to agree with me, but you don't just get to declare me a liar because you don't like or agree with what I said. Additionally this forum is supposedly in support of free speech, but I guess it only counts as long as you don't get Vods panties in a twist.

"People who built up reputations" is a lot of people on this forum, and most of them will not speak up for fear of having their reputations assaulted by asshats like Vod who freak out and abuse their privileged positions to punish people for saying things they don't like.  Actually "users who done once" as you put it was referring to Beastlymac, who was removed from the default trust for negative marking some one who was trying to extort him for posting lies about him.  Its not ok for Beastlymac in a clearly justified situation, but it is ok for Vod. Vods position on the default trust list, that is by definition special status. He has the ability to damage peoples reputations by simply leaving one negative trust rating being on the default trust list. I keep hearing about these extra standards that people on the default trust list should have, yet people like Vod who have demonstrated they are repeatedly willing to abuse the position are allowed to stay on it.


"Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." This is the standard for leaving a negative rating. Saying something that upsets Vod is not equivalent to scamming.

This isn't upsetting Vod, you are telling a lie about whole staffs which is bad for whole forum.


Tell me, what proof do you have that what I said is a lie? Oh yeah, that's right, its YOUR OPINION. The fact that your opinion is in opposition to mine does not make me a liar, it just makes you dishonest for trying to apply that label because you don't like what I have to say. Furthermore, please tell me exactly how one person stating their opinion is going to harm the staff or the forum. I will wait.

BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES IN AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CHILL EFFECT AND PERMANENTLY REMOVE ME AND OTHERS FROM THIS FORUM AS RETALIATION FOR SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THEIR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR, AND THAT OF THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUES.
tommorisonwebdesign
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250



View Profile
August 06, 2015, 02:51:00 AM
 #64

I don't mean to say "TL;DR" but give me a break. You are such a whiner. Reading all of those posts made me want to stop reading this thread. Only reason I read it was because it was linked to OP's signature.

Signatures? How about learning a skill... I don't care either way. Everybody has to make a living somehow.
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2478
Merit: 1006


Welcome to Bitcoin Stalk


View Profile
August 06, 2015, 09:08:12 PM
 #65

I don't mean to say "TL;DR" but give me a break. You are such a whiner. Reading all of those posts made me want to stop reading this thread. Only reason I read it was because it was linked to OP's signature.

Get back to me after you have spent 3 years building a rep here then maybe your opinion will mean something to me. Otherwise you are just another disinterested asshole in the peanut gallery taking pot shots for your own entertainment.

BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES IN AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CHILL EFFECT AND PERMANENTLY REMOVE ME AND OTHERS FROM THIS FORUM AS RETALIATION FOR SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THEIR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR, AND THAT OF THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUES.
BitcoinEXpress
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1279
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 07, 2015, 03:22:46 AM
 #66

I don't mean to say "TL;DR" but give me a break. You are such a whiner. Reading all of those posts made me want to stop reading this thread. Only reason I read it was because it was linked to OP's signature.

Get back to me after you have spent 3 years building a rep here then maybe your opinion will mean something to me. Otherwise you are just another disinterested asshole in the peanut gallery taking pot shots for your own entertainment.


He may be a newbie but he nailed you.

You are a trust rating abusing whiny bitch which is why you were removed from DT.


As always warm regards


~BCX~
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4]  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!