Vod needs to be removed from DefaultTrust.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

"Spreads FUD - calls me a liar, and a fool." is a highly inappropriate comment to leave as a negative trust rating. Calling someone a liar in no way justifies a negative trust, like Vod has given, and is contradictory to the forum's policy of free speech.

I expect more ad hominems in this thread, but in any case Vod needs to be removed from defaulttrust for multiple instances of power tripping.

[1714924575]

1714924575

[1714924575]

1714924575

[1714924575]

1714924575

[1714924575]

1714924575

[1714924575]

1714924575

[Vod]

"Spreads FUD - calls me a liar, and a fool." is a highly inappropriate comment to leave as a negative trust rating. Calling someone a liar in no way justifies a negative trust, like Vod has given, and is contradictory to the forum's policy of free speech.

I expect more ad hominems in this thread, but in any case Vod needs to be removed from defaulttrust for multiple instances of power tripping.

Nah, it's highly appropriate.  I don't trust a person who lies constantly and my rating reflects that.

Appreciate someone like you starting this thread though.  Really boosts my case.   

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I expect more ad hominems in this thread.

Appreciate someone like you starting this thread though.

[Beastlymac]

Ironic coming from a person who leaves negative trust without even reading what has happened.

"$username -1183: -27 / +30(30)   2014-08-01   3.10000000   Reference   Scammed a user for 3.1 BTC."

The information relating to the whole thing was posted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=768105.0

[TECSHARE]

 I have pointed this out before myself, there are several negatives on his list for things that are totally not scam related, but apparently this is ok for people that are buddies of mods and staff, but not for everyone else. I was removed from the default trust list for a SINGLE INCIDENT of leaving feedback outside the scope of what is considered "Scamming" due to ONE COMPLAINT from some one who was clearly harassing me, but clearly VOD is on the special boys club list where he can abuse anyone he likes thousands of times and just say sorry and remove it and no one does anything about it. If VOD had corrected his behavior and became more careful about how he left his ratings I WOULDN'T CARE, in fact my opinion is people should be able to leave trust ratings for ANY REASON, and if the reason isn't valid the community can decide to start untrusting that user for abuse.

 Unfortunately VOD has only gotten worse. Why is it that VOD is allowed to have stacks and stacks of complaints and he is not removed from the default trust, but some how my single incident was unforgivable and I was removed immediately. This is the kind of selective enforcement I was talking about previously. There are NO WRITTEN RULES, therefore the only standard one has to follow is the complete lack of enforcement seen with people like VOD. Yet we are supposed to know this is ok for him, but not ok for anyone else? THIS is why I refuse to shut my mouth about the subject. The staff foster an atmosphere of unwritten rules and ambiguity and selectively enforce the rules, but we are just supposed to know how all of this works from the outside. Complete bullshit.

[Quickseller]

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.

[Vod]

I have pointed this out before myself, there are several negatives on his list for things that are totally not scam related, but apparently this is ok for people that are buddies of mods and staff, but not for everyone else. I was removed from the default trust list for a SINGLE INCIDENT of leaving feedback outside the scope of what is considered "Scamming" due to ONE COMPLAINT from some one who was clearly harassing me, but clearly VOD is on the special boys club list where he can abuse anyone he likes thousands of times and just say sorry and remove it and no one does anything about it. If VOD had corrected his behavior and became more careful about how he left his ratings I WOULDN'T CARE, in fact my opinion is people should be able to leave trust ratings for ANY REASON, and if the reason isn't valid the community can decide to start untrusting that user for abuse.

Hey, I know where you're coming from.  I almost got removed from DefaultTrust last night for a SINGLE INCIDENT from ONE COMPLAINT.  Luckily, I had already spent the day believing I was wrong and was removing the feedback anyway.  My sponsorship in Defaulttrust is no different than yours was - except that I am willing to remove unjustified feedback.  There has been no one that has complained about me that I haven't easily proven they are a liar. 

So I'll ask you to stop lying - I'm not in a special boys club and I don't abuse anyone.

[Inotanewbie]

Well to be fair if everyone had listened to Vod then no one would be worrying about being able to withdraw their money from bitstamp when it reopens

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=38966

[TECSHARE]

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the scammers. In reality all he does it force them to change names, and in the mean time people who are trying to operate honestly have their hard earned trust burned! Which one are we inhibiting more, the scammer or the honest innocent user caught up in "scambusting" bullshit with little or no evidence? I don't beleive he is providing a service any longer because his standards are so low and he enjoys tormenting people far too much. IMO VOD and other "scambusters" are the main source of mailcontent over the trust system.

I have pointed this out before myself, there are several negatives on his list for things that are totally not scam related, but apparently this is ok for people that are buddies of mods and staff, but not for everyone else. I was removed from the default trust list for a SINGLE INCIDENT of leaving feedback outside the scope of what is considered "Scamming" due to ONE COMPLAINT from some one who was clearly harassing me, but clearly VOD is on the special boys club list where he can abuse anyone he likes thousands of times and just say sorry and remove it and no one does anything about it. If VOD had corrected his behavior and became more careful about how he left his ratings I WOULDN'T CARE, in fact my opinion is people should be able to leave trust ratings for ANY REASON, and if the reason isn't valid the community can decide to start untrusting that user for abuse.

Hey, I know where you're coming from.  I almost got removed from DefaultTrust last night for a SINGLE INCIDENT from ONE COMPLAINT.  Luckily, I had already spent the day believing I was wrong and was removing the feedback anyway.  My sponsorship in Defaulttrust is no different than yours was - except that I am willing to remove unjustified feedback.  There has been no one that has complained about me that I haven't easily proven they are a liar.  

So I'll ask you to stop lying - I'm not in a special boys club and I don't abuse anyone.

So because the staff don't bother to confront you on the STACK of justified accusations against you, as well as several non scamming related feedbacks, some how our situations were similar? I am absolutely disgusted to be compared to you with the way you act. You are in fact abusive and you are not only careless in how you apply negative ratings to people, you also leave them for things like "annoying" you or "lyng", things which are NO DIFFERENT than what my supposed unjust use of trust was for. Yet there they sit still in your feedback, and staff continue to back you up regardless of how abusive or unrestrained you have become.

[Vod]

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the trolls.

Ah, so now you are smarter than everyone else on the forum?

Everyone's assumption is wrong, but yours alone is right?

 

[Beastlymac]

I have pointed this out before myself, there are several negatives on his list for things that are totally not scam related, but apparently this is ok for people that are buddies of mods and staff, but not for everyone else. I was removed from the default trust list for a SINGLE INCIDENT of leaving feedback outside the scope of what is considered "Scamming" due to ONE COMPLAINT from some one who was clearly harassing me, but clearly VOD is on the special boys club list where he can abuse anyone he likes thousands of times and just say sorry and remove it and no one does anything about it. If VOD had corrected his behavior and became more careful about how he left his ratings I WOULDN'T CARE, in fact my opinion is people should be able to leave trust ratings for ANY REASON, and if the reason isn't valid the community can decide to start untrusting that user for abuse.

Hey, I know where you're coming from.  I almost got removed from DefaultTrust last night for a SINGLE INCIDENT from ONE COMPLAINT.  Luckily, I had already spent the day believing I was wrong and was removing the feedback anyway.  My sponsorship in Defaulttrust is no different than yours was - except that I am willing to remove unjustified feedback.  There has been no one that has complained about me that I haven't easily proven they are a liar. 

So I'll ask you to stop lying - I'm not in a special boys club and I don't abuse anyone.

I was able to prove that the person i left negative feedback on was a liar and that my feedback was backed with evidence yet i was still removed.

[TECSHARE]

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the trolls.

Ah, so now you are smarter than everyone else on the forum?

Everyone's assumption is wrong, but yours alone is right?

 

Yes, because clearly EVERYONE agrees with VOD.

[Quickseller]

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the trolls. In reality all he does it force them to change names, and in the mean time people who are trying to operate honestly have their hard earned trust burned! Which one are we inhibiting more, the scammer or the honest innocent user caught up in "scambusting" bullshit with little or no evidence? I don't beleive he is providing a service any longer because his standards are so low and he enjoys tormenting people far too much. IMO VOD and other "scambusters" are the main source of mailcontent over the trust system.

If by "assume he helps with the trolls" you mean he helps with the scammers, then yes a lot of people do assume that. It is too bad that you cannot see more stats about the user when you look at trust reports on someone's trust page (you can only see the username, trust rating/score, amount risked, reference link and comment). It would be helpful if you could see things like rank, number of posts and date registered. I am fairly certain that if this information was more easily available then you would see that most of Vod's sent feedback is to brand new users and users at junior member or lower. The exceptions to this rule is for people who have defaulted on loans and who have a scam accusation against them.

It is possible to recover from a negative trust rating from Vod (or anyone else on default trust list), however it will just take time. It would be inaccurate to say it is impossible to continue to do business when you have a negative rating (just look at TF - he has a horrible rating but is still able to do a small amount of business).

edit: yes it is more difficult to do business with a negative rating but it is still possible.

[takagari]

Well.
Funny really

VOD leaves negative feedback over on me, as he reads my thread wrong, than continues to state I'm not even Canadian.

I PM him.
A few hours and nothing, than I see he has been online (Apparently his profile lied, no way for me to know this)
So I send him a pissed off PM, and a few more thread's. As I had spent the day looking at ALL the people he has trust scammed.

A staff ask's me to remove my negative on him, so I do, and I lock two of the threads.
After a while he decides to admit he was wrong, and removes my negative, instead replacing it with a neutral, still calling me a liar and warning people to stay away.

So I replace my negative and don't accept this.
He called me a liar, without proof. Why can he simply attack a person over them say "My postal code has 000 in it" Which really meant "Has zero's in it" or "When the letters are removed I end up with three zeros"
And than go on another thread of mine, state I'm not likely even Canadian.

I wanted all trace of his attacking my character gone from my trust system, He has NEVER had a personal dealing with me.

If he at this point wishes to leave a neutral, saying I'm a hot head. That would be acceptable.

But the old neutral was calling me a liar, a cheat and warning people away.

A joke really.
Just look a the thread's, how he goes in circles. and ignores my questions, continues to call me a liar.

[takagari]

"Spreads FUD - calls me a liar, and a fool." is a highly inappropriate comment to leave as a negative trust rating. Calling someone a liar in no way justifies a negative trust, like Vod has given, and is contradictory to the forum's policy of free speech.

I expect more ad hominems in this thread, but in any case Vod needs to be removed from defaulttrust for multiple instances of power tripping.

This guy BTW is my other negative trust, not really sure why, I paid back his loan. B=But he has me blocked, and still feels a need to step in and call VOD out?...


Thanks for support

[Vod]

VOD leaves negative feedback over on me, as he reads my thread wrong, than continues to state I'm not even Canadian.

You are lying right now.  

I don't continue to state you're not Canadian... I think I said it ONCE when you couldn't spell the name of your country and you thought postal codes were all numbers.

Please feel free to provide your imaginary proof that I continue to state this.

I thought you were down for the night...

[TECSHARE]

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the trolls. In reality all he does it force them to change names, and in the mean time people who are trying to operate honestly have their hard earned trust burned! Which one are we inhibiting more, the scammer or the honest innocent user caught up in "scambusting" bullshit with little or no evidence? I don't beleive he is providing a service any longer because his standards are so low and he enjoys tormenting people far too much. IMO VOD and other "scambusters" are the main source of mailcontent over the trust system.

If by "assume he helps with the trolls" you mean he helps with the scammers, then yes a lot of people do assume that. It is too bad that you cannot see more stats about the user when you look at trust reports on someone's trust page (you can only see the username, trust rating/score, amount risked, reference link and comment). It would be helpful if you could see things like rank, number of posts and date registered. I am fairly certain that if this information was more easily available then you would see that most of Vod's sent feedback is to brand new users and users at junior member or lower. The exceptions to this rule is for people who have defaulted on loans and who have a scam accusation against them.

It is possible to recover from a negative trust rating from Vod (or anyone else on default trust list), however it will just take time. It would be inaccurate to say it is impossible to continue to do business when you have a negative rating (just look at TF - he has a horrible rating but is still able to do a small amount of business).

edit: yes it is more difficult to do business with a negative rating but it is still possible.

I did mean scammers, yes. Simple question though. Which is the bigger barrier? The one VOD puts up for scammers via shotgunning negative ratings everywhere with little or no evidence, or the honest users that have all of their time money and effort wasted who at THE VERY LEAST have to wait months to even discuss having it removed. IMO this is just leading to innocent users being falsely accused and either driving them away or driving them into the ranks of trolls and scammers.

I repeat - A scammer can just get a new name or buy a new account. An HONEST USER loses all the time, money, and effort they invested into their username (often years of work) over accusations that VOD does not even bother to verify most of the time. Several of his ratings are simply for "annoying" him or "lying". Last time I checked that is not an acceptable use of the trust system. VODs practices are FAR MORE DESTRUCTIVE to this community than the good he may or may not do "stopping" scammers (who return minutes later).

This is a well known subversion tactic. Get the enemy playing whack-a-mole so much that thy start catching up honest people, then as more and more honest people are burned sentiment turns against the authority handing these dictates down. It is a recipe for this community's destruction.

[takagari]

VOD leaves negative feedback over on me, as he reads my thread wrong, than continues to state I'm not even Canadian.

You are lying right now.  

I don't continue to state you're not Canadian... I think I said it ONCE when you couldn't spell the name of your country and you thought postal codes were all numbers.

Please feel free to provide your imaginary proof that I continue to state this.

I thought you were down for the night...

Always with the insults and attacks to win huh? It's only 11pm.

You said it.
And what other lie's.
I stated that the pm I got from you you yelled and laughed at me.
You may not have said that or wrote LOL But it's all in context

You're an idiot.  I haven't been online all day - been babysitting.

So you are correct, I LIED that you laughed. You did call me an idiot however. and your profile HAD stated you were online at some point last night. So it was within my right to assume you had been online and ignored me.

So you decide to leave a negative scammer rating (on a system for detecting scammers) over a personal hurt feelings report because I didn't lay down and take your horse shit, like so many others have.

Just delete you feedback, don't leave any. And I'll walk away. But you couldn't do that this morning. You had to get one last dig in with a neutral, calling me a liar anyway. And I:M the child?


All this guy does is post bullshit and drama

.EXE FILE POSSIBLE MALWARE.  DO NOT DOWNLOAD.

OMG, THIS right here proves how much of a pure dickhead you are.

Read the f*cking post. Holy Crap!

A lot of people are as gullible as you, and believe whatever they read.

I am trying to protect those people from getting scammed.   Move on.

[Quickseller]

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the trolls. In reality all he does it force them to change names, and in the mean time people who are trying to operate honestly have their hard earned trust burned! Which one are we inhibiting more, the scammer or the honest innocent user caught up in "scambusting" bullshit with little or no evidence? I don't beleive he is providing a service any longer because his standards are so low and he enjoys tormenting people far too much. IMO VOD and other "scambusters" are the main source of mailcontent over the trust system.

If by "assume he helps with the trolls" you mean he helps with the scammers, then yes a lot of people do assume that. It is too bad that you cannot see more stats about the user when you look at trust reports on someone's trust page (you can only see the username, trust rating/score, amount risked, reference link and comment). It would be helpful if you could see things like rank, number of posts and date registered. I am fairly certain that if this information was more easily available then you would see that most of Vod's sent feedback is to brand new users and users at junior member or lower. The exceptions to this rule is for people who have defaulted on loans and who have a scam accusation against them.

It is possible to recover from a negative trust rating from Vod (or anyone else on default trust list), however it will just take time. It would be inaccurate to say it is impossible to continue to do business when you have a negative rating (just look at TF - he has a horrible rating but is still able to do a small amount of business).

edit: yes it is more difficult to do business with a negative rating but it is still possible.

I did mean scammers, yes. Simple question though. Which is the bigger barrier? The one VOD puts up for scammers via shotgunning negative ratings everywhere with little or no evidence, or the honest users that have all of their time money and effort wasted who at THE VERY LEAST have to wait months to even discuss having it removed. IMO this is just leading to innocent users being falsely accused and either driving them away or driving them into the ranks of trolls and scammers.

I repeat - A scammer can just get a new name or buy a new account. An HONEST USER loses all the time, money, and effort they invested into their username (often years of work) over accusations that VOD does not even bother to verify most of the time. Several of his ratings are simply for "annoying" him or "lying". Last time I checked that is not an acceptable use of the trust system. VODs practices are FAR MORE DESTRUCTIVE to this community than the good he may or may not do "stopping" scammers (who return minutes later).

This is a well known subversion tactic. Get the enemy playing whack-a-mole so much that thy start catching up honest people, then as more and more honest people are burned sentiment turns against the authority handing these dictates down. It is a recipe for this community's destruction.

Well why don't we look at the effects of getting a negative trust report from someone on default trust list. Assuming you do not have preexisting trust feedback to overcome the negative trust then you will get a trade with extreme caution tag. If you are someone who engages in business that requires an extreme amount of trust, for example someone who deals in gift cards or may need to handle personal information then yes this tag would be detrimental to your business. If however you engage in business where transactions can easily be moderated by some kind of trusted escrow service then all a trade with caution tag will do is get a person's customers to want to use escrow more often. As these people make more deals the positive trust they receive will outweigh one scam report from one user (if one person gives two or more scam reports on the same person it will only count as one).

A honest person can buy a new account with fresh neutral trust in the event it is tarnished beyond repair as you describe would happen. IMO a honest person is actually more likely to do so then a scammer because a scammer is risking the purchase price of the new account for when they get caught again while an honest person with an unjust scam rating intends to continue to operate honestly moving forward.

I personally think Vod giving negative trust by jumping the gun like he originally did in the case discussed in the OP is an exception to the rule.

I would disagree that "lying" is not a valid reason to give someone negative trust. If you are lying about how much bitcoin you have or about your prior trade history then you are trying to get your trading partner to be more comfortable with you which would potentially make them more vulnerable to get scammed. In order to scam someone you obviously need to lie at least one time in order to get the other person to give you money in the assumption they will get something in return.

[takagari]

Agreed, but what 3 or more cases has he caught me in a lie. Especially one of enough importance to show my untrustworthy.
If you look at the other thread, I took apart the feedback he left me, as it was in fact full of lie's to make things seems worse.