TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
 |
February 07, 2020, 09:27:32 AM |
|
Here we see the original accusation Vod made, which Nutilduh also very thirsty to settle vendettas invents a seemingly plausible narrative based on his accusation, then Vod uses the accusation based on his accusation, to make yet another accusation, claiming it is based on those first accusations. Of course nothing actually substantiated anywhere. This is textbook information laundering. Yeah, for the last few weeks he has been putting aside his morals and belief structure to get back on DT. He stopped distrusting everyone and started trusting many others, hoping for retaliatory trust. It was a good example for Theymos to see just how easily idiots can get on DT right now. ABitNut, I am requesting on StonerStanley's behalf that you please remove your negative rating for him. He has taken the first conciliatory step towards mutual restoration, and your original rating seems somewhat baseless.
@ABiNut, no one will blame you if you tell the hypocrite TECHSHARE to fuck off. He really should look at his abusive feedback before he comments on others. If TECHY threatens to distrust if you don't do as he demands, myself and many others will counter his baseless accusation. Vod 2019-09-09 Reference "This profile has fundamentally abused the trust system, trading positive trust with as many others as possible to get on Default Trust. See reference and the BPIP DT Change Log for examples. Do not trust this profile's trust of others by adding ~TECSHARE to your personal trust list." As you can see all of this happens within a few days of me again being put on the Default trust 1. Vod of course feels that he can personally dictate who can and can not be on default trust by manufacturing baseless accusations to cater the default trust to his liking, but of course I am manipulating it not him. Fine. If you want to abuse trust and throw away all your ethics just to get on DT; that is just your true nature. But fuck off telling people to clean up their lists when you don't do it yourself. Outside of OP's issue with ABitNut, this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be discouraged in the DT system.
Theymos has already stated the idiot TECHY has no place near DT. I believe his ultimate goal is to make the forum collapse by making it difficult to do business here. We either do it his way, or we don't get to do it at all. :/ How am I making it difficult to do business here Vod? I can tell you how you make it difficult to do business here. An interesting concept also considering you don't actually do any business here, it seems decidedly more of a problem for me if it is difficult to do business here. Projecting again Vod? |
|
|
|
|
marlboroza
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2272
|
|
February 07, 2020, 04:36:38 PM
Last edit: February 07, 2020, 05:06:07 PM by marlboroza |
|
Or here where he accuses me of being a pedophile in a Politics & Society hijacking the subject of a post of all places. The Coronavirus will not last long. It was made in China.   Unless you are suggesting that Vod should not be allowed to speak or at least forum should limit his freedom of speech?  Regarding other quotes... Can you substantiate ANY of these accusations? Mind you this is just since December...there is so much more. Like I said from the beginning, this is what he does, never substantiating any of it. Now he is directly using the trust system as a tool of abuse. What's the point? Every time someone point you your lies, hypocrisy, "not-trust abuse", deflecting etc you just troll them, hoping no one will notice...
~
ibminer
~
I hold all of you directly accountable for his actions.
So are you going on record saying you are willing to be held accountable for all feedback and/or actions of the people in your trust list?? I'd be careful if I were you.  Don't worry about it, TECSHARE would never go public with something like this. He will send you PM soon. If you really gave a fuck about who I included you would message me about it instead of making a 3 ring circus about it clearly demonstrating this is about targeting me personally, not who is on my trust list.
Can you hypocrite please move this thread to reputation like you expect others to do? Why is this even in meta?
NOTE TO MODERATORS: [...] please move it to the appropriate subforum of REPUTATION as per my report where it belongs. Thank you.
Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
|
February 07, 2020, 11:08:35 PM
Last edit: February 15, 2020, 01:31:27 AM by TECSHARE |
|
Since the moderators have determined me defending myself from Vod's accusation in the thread about Nullius's trust system abuse is off topic, even though Vod's accusation is completely what it is based on, I guess I will just post my removed posts from there here since criticism of Vod's behavior always seems to be off topic even when it is very much on topic. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. How does Theymos stating it's best to forgive make you an imaginary doctor, idiot? Stop your trust abuse. Your jealousy has no place on DT.  Did I imagine you doxing OGNasty and threatening to call the IRS on him Vod? A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. Did I imagine you doxing OGNasty and threatening to call the IRS on him Vod?
I have no idea what you imagine - people cannot read other people's minds. Theymos asks you to forgive and you decide that makes you a doctor? Idiot. Did you or did you not dox OGNasty and claim to report him to the IRS? A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. Frankly in spite of my low expectations for people in general, I am amazed how many here think this has any substance to it whatsoever when it is literally nothing more than an accusation.
If you think so low of us, try leading by example and removing your trust abuse. You are an idiot, not a doctor, fortune teller or mind reader. Your skill set is limited to repackaging garbage and delivering it to your local post office. :/ No antipathy here! None whatsoever. Is this " contributing to the community"? A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. Just more accusations stacked on top of old unsubstantiated accusations. No one can show anything demonstrable to support their claims, only a long string of accusations from people with personal issues. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.msg53761336#msg53761336Lectures me about setting and example about "forgiveness" as he negative rates me. These two are having fun trying to reinforce each other's accusations without actually substantiating anything. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. He can't seem to say what I "lied" about either. Lots of people have asked for quotes but he just topic slides and makes more accusations as usual.
He said you lied about posting a private messages of a someone because wouldnt they wouldn't argue with you. He posted a reference link directly in the feed back:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5148016.msg51275676#msg51275676 I didn't post his PM because he ignored me. and then I see, so the fact that I posted that message is more of a problem than his duplicity and inability to have a conversation like an adult. Got it. You know what would have prevented that? Him willing to have a conversation about it, instead he chose to hide like a coward rather than explain himself. So it appears you said you didn't post the pm because he ignored you. And then you said if he was willing to have a conversation you wouldn't have posted it. Twitchy Seal as usual has to resort to selectively editing my quotes to try to cast aspersions and serve his political motives by engaging in shit slinging over forum issues. Notice his "quotes" aren't live. I wonder why that is, perhaps he doesn't want you to read what I ACTUALLY said, instead of his selectively edited interpretations of what he thinks I meant. I didn't post his PM because he ignored me. I posted his PM because he acted friendly after I offered to help him, a day later he removes, blocks, and excludes me without explanation (for calling you out BTW), and then insinuates he had to do it because I was harassing him.
I see, so the fact that I posted that message is more of a problem than his duplicity and inability to have a conversation like an adult. Got it. You know what would have prevented that? Him willing to have a conversation about it, instead he chose to hide like a coward rather than explain himself.
Watch yourself peeps...  Nice selective editing. Yeah pay no attention to the IRS kicking in your door, what is important is I posted a personal message in public! EDIT FOR REFERENCE: The actual post so people can read what was actually said since Vod is using the trust system as his personal play toy for retribution again: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5145975.msg51187013#msg51187013Made no lie, and there was no damage done to Hhampuz. This even wasn't a problem for anyone, but Vod finds it an opportunity to make an excuse to get his retribution for daring to tag him for the clearly wrong act of doxing OGNasty which is well documented and not under dispute. His ratings against me are simply transparent retribution and an attempt to extort me into removing that rating. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. I remember reading the post, it was completly forgotten when I written the last reply.
Can't get to make my mind up of what ognasty did, a ponzi, however i still hope the seat users are fine, I has a friend that has the collection and seeing the btc raise is a quite nice feature i loved since i first got to see them.
Can't say i know what techy lied about but man this is a long thread.
Trust abuse side goes for quite a lot of users, I spent a good while negative rating shit and I done quite a few mistaken ratings i was needed to remove problem is when you such a big group close minded that because of proudness and ego you keep your shit and refuse to change your mind or inform yourself a bit better.
I has a while wondering if insults are bannable.
He can't seem to say what I "lied" about either. Lots of people have asked for quotes but he just topic slides and makes more accusations as usual. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. You are using all of the force and trust of the community as a weapon
I hope you understand the community gave you the same trust. You showed you could not be trusted. The same community that trusts me does not trust you. Either the trust system maintains base standards for everyone, or all it will be is a joke used to abuse its most long standing and trusted members.
Geez Techy, how much more standardized could your trust and my trust be? Identical ratings, both equally factual. If my trust is abusive, then you were abusive first. So when did I dox OGNasty and threaten to report him to the IRS, since both ratings are equivalent? The rating I left for you is based on publicly observable documented fact that you doxed and threatened another user. Your rating is childish refractory retaliation for leaving that rating and a pathetic and transparent attempt at extorting me into removing it. None of your accusations have any basis in fact. My reason for leaving the rating for you is publicly provable as true. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. You are using all of the force and trust of the community as a weapon
I hope you understand the community gave you the same trust. You showed you could not be trusted. The same community that trusts me does not trust you. Either the trust system maintains base standards for everyone, or all it will be is a joke used to abuse its most long standing and trusted members.
Geez Techy, how much more standardized could your trust and my trust be? Identical ratings, both equally factual. If my trust is abusive, then you were abusive first. For now, as a priority, I am replying at some length to make it unequivocally clear to you, Vod, that (1) I refrain from replying to TECSHARE’s drivel because it is drivel, not for any lack of confidence in tags that, as you will note, I am still firmly supporting; and, (2) I am unimpressed at TECSHARE’s attempt to coerce your supporters. Some of the names on his hate-list look mighty tough to me. I doubt that they will throw you under the bus to appease TECSHARE, of all creatures (!); and if they do, I hope that others will step up to support you.*
OK bud - when Techy claims to win because you won't reply, I'll point users to this information. I wish I had your ability to ignore unethical idiots. :/ So when did I dox OGNasty and threaten to report him to the IRS, since both ratings are equivalent?
Sorry, my tolerance does not extend to this level of idiocy. Read the reference link and you'll see what I posted is accurate and true. You are the one that claimed your rating for me was equal to the rating I left for you. When did I dox people and threaten to report them to the IRS? That was all you Vod, the whole forum saw it. It is a fact. If I edited my rating comment to remove the reference to your very apparent mental disorder would you then consider that a valid negative rating, or do you just get to use the trust system as your tool to punish people and never ever get held accountable under it? It seems like that is what you want, you get to use the trust system to punish people for not agreeing with you and then never be held to any of the standards you apply to others on a daily basis. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted. Anyone else confused by my substantiation of Techy's trust? Let me know.
Considering you have substantiated zero of your claims, that would be impossible. Simply repeating that you have substantiated your claims is not substantiation of your accusations. Why would anyone get the impression mods are bias against them when they aren't even allowed to defend themselves from accusations in a thread they created themselves to discuss it? |
|
|
|
|
marlboroza
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2272
|
|
February 07, 2020, 11:53:56 PM
Last edit: February 08, 2020, 12:05:15 AM by marlboroza |
|
Why would anyone get the impression mods are bias against them when they aren't even allowed to defend themselves from accusations in a thread they created themselves to discuss it?
Stop shitposting, many posts have been removed from that thread, including my where I pointed you saying " no one cares about proofs of accusation". As for some other parts of this post, you said: Since the moderators have determined me defending myself from Vod's accusation in the thread about Nullius's trust system abuse is off topic, even though Vod's accusation is completely what it is based on, I guess I will just post my removed posts from there here since criticism of Vod's behavior always seems to be off topic even when it is very much on topic. And you quoted conversation between you and TwitchySeal, so you are accusing Vod and TwitchSeal that they are alt accounts. You are crazy. (not to mention that you said you posted PM because someone ignored you then you said it is not true - so you are crazy again.) Just accept that more people are accusing you, it is not Vod only. Archived for future reference: http://archive.is/wip/HNNqh |
|
|
|
|
Vod
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 3166
Licking my boob since 1970
|
|
February 08, 2020, 01:19:16 AM |
|
Please stay on topic. This is a "positive feedback loop". You complain about a belief mods are targeting you deleting posts, which leads to those posts being deleted for being off topic... If you have an issue with marlboroza, don't discuss it in this thread.  Just accept that more people are accusing you, it is not Vod only.
That is worded as a demand, which Techy will focus on and attack you. :/ Better: More people are accusing Techy - not just me. |
|
|
|
JaredKaragen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1166
My AR-15 ID's itself as a toaster. Want breakfast?
|
|
February 08, 2020, 03:25:11 AM |
|
*snip* Vod 2019-09-09 Reference "This profile has fundamentally abused the trust system, trading positive trust with as many others as possible to get on Default Trust. See reference and the BPIP DT Change Log for examples. Do not trust this profile's trust of others by adding ~TECSHARE to your personal trust list." As you can see all of this happens within a few days of me again being put on the Default trust 1. Vod of course feels that he can personally dictate who can and can not be on default trust by manufacturing baseless accusations to cater the default trust to his liking, but of course I am manipulating it not him. Fine. If you want to abuse trust and throw away all your ethics just to get on DT; that is just your true nature. But fuck off telling people to clean up their lists when you don't do it yourself. Outside of OP's issue with ABitNut, this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be discouraged in the DT system.
Theymos has already stated the idiot TECHY has no place near DT. I believe his ultimate goal is to make the forum collapse by making it difficult to do business here. We either do it his way, or we don't get to do it at all. :/ How am I making it difficult to do business here Vod? I can tell you how you make it difficult to do business here. An interesting concept also considering you don't actually do any business here, it seems decidedly more of a problem for me if it is difficult to do business here. Projecting again Vod? ok, as an outside perspective: you showed the genesis; and retrospectively the neg trust, with its reference. I will be as pragmatic, kurt, and fair and impartial as I can. If you want me to give you the courtesy, do me the same and leave denigration at the door; stick to simple facts with references. You say it is a feedback loop; but here's the rub... when I investigate this; I want to ask one question: Is there a link to theymos stating Tech should not be on DT Vod? This would solidify the accusation of being substantially more than just plausible; and solidifies even more the need to have the below answered. TEC: A deep explanation of how you formed these specific links to seemingly random people to get back on DT... is interesting to say the least; and I am intrigued to have cleared up and explained in detail. This being if the above claim by Vod (an extremely trusted member) is true. Getting kicked off DT isn't a small thing, and it means a huge breech of trust. It does seem fishy from a purely outsider "never been in the middle of this" situation. I have to be fair given the facts I can see ¿comprende? I'm not here to pick sides, I am here to get to the bottom of all this drama. We have had debates before and I have a level of respect for you; I'm not here for debates or flinging of whatever. I'm trying to solve some obvious problems cause people feel the need to air their laundry in the front yard sometimes so might as well look for the air freshener. Now; I am assuming there was something substantial done in the past... which lead to you losing DT (either your action, or an accusation against you). The simple fact that you got back on DT from a negative position, by means of such random accounts.... Does not add up at all no matter how I try to think about it, so thus why I asked you the paragraph above. There was quite an effort put there to get on DT. I personally am curious as to why which the answered questions will give. |
|
|
|
TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
|
February 08, 2020, 03:47:46 AM |
|
*snip* Vod 2019-09-09 Reference "This profile has fundamentally abused the trust system, trading positive trust with as many others as possible to get on Default Trust. See reference and the BPIP DT Change Log for examples. Do not trust this profile's trust of others by adding ~TECSHARE to your personal trust list." As you can see all of this happens within a few days of me again being put on the Default trust 1. Vod of course feels that he can personally dictate who can and can not be on default trust by manufacturing baseless accusations to cater the default trust to his liking, but of course I am manipulating it not him. Fine. If you want to abuse trust and throw away all your ethics just to get on DT; that is just your true nature. But fuck off telling people to clean up their lists when you don't do it yourself. Outside of OP's issue with ABitNut, this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be discouraged in the DT system.
Theymos has already stated the idiot TECHY has no place near DT. I believe his ultimate goal is to make the forum collapse by making it difficult to do business here. We either do it his way, or we don't get to do it at all. :/ How am I making it difficult to do business here Vod? I can tell you how you make it difficult to do business here. An interesting concept also considering you don't actually do any business here, it seems decidedly more of a problem for me if it is difficult to do business here. Projecting again Vod? ok, as an outside perspective: you showed the genesis; and retrospectively the neg trust, with its reference. I will be as pragmatic, kurt, and fair and impartial as I can. If you want me to give you the courtesy, do me the same and leave denigration at the door; stick to simple facts with references. You say it is a feedback loop; but here's the rub... when I investigate this; I want to ask one question: Is there a link to theymos stating Tech should not be on DT Vod? This would solidify the accusation of being substantially more than just plausible; and solidifies even more the need to have the below answered. TEC: A deep explanation of how you formed these specific links to seemingly random people to get back on DT... is interesting to say the least; and I am intrigued to have cleared up and explained in detail. This being if the above claim by Vod (an extremely trusted member) is true. Getting kicked off DT isn't a small thing, and it means a huge breech of trust. It does seem fishy from a purely outsider "never been in the middle of this" situation. I have to be fair given the facts I can see ¿comprende? I'm not here to pick sides, I am here to get to the bottom of all this drama. We have had debates before and I have a level of respect for you; I'm not here for debates or flinging of whatever. I'm trying to solve some obvious problems cause people feel the need to air their laundry in the front yard sometimes so might as well look for the air freshener. Now; I am assuming there was something substantial done in the past... which lead to you losing DT (either your action, or an accusation against you). The simple fact that you got back on DT from a negative position, by means of such random accounts.... Does not add up at all no matter how I try to think about it, so thus why I asked you the paragraph above. There was quite an effort put there to get on DT. I personally am curious as to why which the answered questions will give. You seem like a reasonable person, and act with respect. I have no reason not to reciprocate. First, I would like to say that it is not upon me to prove my innocence, it is upon an accuser to prove the validity of their accusations. This is a base standard of any system of law or justice. That said, if you review the original thread Vod bases his accusation on, you will see I made an effort to mutually resolve a conflict between members of the Turkish community and Timelord. This lead to several interactions with several of the members of the Turkish community, of which I gained respect for because of how they handled the response. I must assume they felt the same way and this is why they added me. I didn't do anything I wasn't supposed to and these accusations are nothing but a tall tale designed to make sure I wasn't allowed to be put back on the default trust instigated by people with very long time, publicly documented animus against me. In Vod's case his history of trust system abuse targeting me is well documented in this thread. |
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
February 08, 2020, 04:04:46 AM |
|
I would like to say that it is not upon me to prove my innocence, it is upon an accuser to prove the validity of their accusations. This is a base standard of any system of law or justice.
Playing the 'law and order' card is pretty rich considering you don't hold yourself to the same standard when the roles are reversed. You can't have it both ways and always be the victim. I think he just overlooked the possibility that you were responding to my post in a thread I didn't post in.
Are you accusing him of lying about deleting your post? Seems unlikely to me, but this isn't the first time he has explicitly told you that he didn't delete a post from your "FLYING HELLFISH - SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT AND CENSORSHIP" thread, and you seem to just not care.
If you think he's lying, call him out on it and maybe we can get to the bottom of it.
If you don't think he's lying, then remove the posts he says he didn't delete.
Or do nothing if you don't care if your accusations against FH are accurate or not. I don't care what he did or says. A moderator deleted those posts, this is a fact as evidenced by the quotes. Him claiming not to have done it in a section he is in charge of and just saying it was "some one else" is not a resolution, even if he thinks it is for him. I have absolutely no way to verify anything he says. |
|
|
|
nutildah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3164
Merit: 8557
Happy 10th Birthday to Dogeparty!
|
|
February 08, 2020, 04:18:14 AM |
|
That said, if you review the original thread Vod bases his accusation on, you will see I made an effort to mutually resolve a conflict between members of the Turkish community and Timelord. This lead to several interactions with several of the members of the Turkish community, of which I gained respect for because of how they handled the response. I must assume they felt the same way and this is why they added me. I didn't do anything I wasn't supposed to and these accusations are nothing but a tall tale designed to make sure I wasn't allowed to be put back on the default trust instigated by people with very long time, publicly documented animus against me. Your timeline is off. The trust trading was happening well before your involvement with Timelord's fake flag bonanza. The post you linked is dated September 7th, and you were playing trust games with Russian and Turkish local board posters from July through August. The only reason these users were on your radar was because they had recently been promoted to DT1, and like you, were either off or barely hanging on by 1-2 votes. Your other great rationale for adding local board posters is because somebody like Foxpup, suchmoon or myself distrust them, which according to you, "makes them interesting." Still a terrible reason to include someone in your trust list, and evidence you don't belong on DT. Is there a link to theymos stating Tech should not be on DT Vod? This would solidify the accusation of being substantially more than just plausible; and solidifies even more the need to have the below answered.
I assume he's talking about this, but there could be other instances of theymos inferring the same thing: So if some one who trusts me also trusts the default trust, then I become untrusted.
That's not how it works. If someone adds you directly to their trust list, then no exclusions will cause you to be removed. Your constant obsessive ramblings about this prove that you don't belong in the default trust network. What's funny is in almost 5 years absolutely nothing has changed. |
|
|
|
JaredKaragen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1166
My AR-15 ID's itself as a toaster. Want breakfast?
|
|
February 08, 2020, 04:25:19 AM |
|
I will leave it to Vod to substantiate the claim from Theymos; *edit, thanks nut*
and the reason for your initial removal from DT is still unanswered.... I don't know that history.
I appreciate your answer, can you tell me if there is post history between you and these persons I could easily look up to verify it? around what dates should I look for those posts? (helps narrow it down when I go to look, unless you link me)
These are my thoughts. thus far..... need more information^^^
Thank you for the respect; it goes a long way.
Any claims of discourse in the form of PM's; well.... idk how to approach that as its in the realm of "manipulable" in my book, so it doesn't carry much weight of evidence unless an admin verifies it. (no way to be in cahoots with another party when its archived public, or admin verified private data)
Yeah I remember all the stuff going on in the turkish board bleeding into meta as well;
I did open my mouth in a few threads with some accusations based on merit abuse and gave my opinion, then later on some based on DT abuse, and several of the accused were Turkish members whom have banned alts.... yet were(are?) on DT using an alt when they should be excommunicated/expunged... I remember looking at them and on at least 4 of them: the evidence was solid against the accused.
so....
It was a sticky situation [as it is developing to be right about this sentence], and my main commenting in those threads was focused on how insane and misplaced many of the words from wolwoo were... he was straight up defending obvious ban evaders using this logic; "they are turkish that you accuse and everyone is attacking turkish", not acknowledging the truth of the facts presented by the accuser of x situation (there were over 6). To wolwoo the facts be damned, he wanted to be able to spread merit and be on DT.... and have us be ok with attacking people in a very extreme manner just for something as simple as questioning the motive of his actions/words in the slightest.
There were many things going on right at that same time....
*edit* thanks nutildah. Well taken. I carry his sentiment, backed up by my statements on wolwoo. Doesn't mean im against him, its just, not in a position of power with that loose of a "verbal grounds" so to speak. To each their own, but the greater part of society can't stand it from what I have seen over the years.
Still most curious as to how you lost DT the first time Tecshare? (were you ever on DT? i don't wanna assume anything at this point) It does add to the scope of all of this and is 100% necessary info.
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
February 08, 2020, 04:42:41 AM
Last edit: February 08, 2020, 06:23:11 AM by TwitchySeal |
|
Still most curious as to how you lost DT the first time Tecshare? (were you ever on DT? i don't wanna assume anything at this point) It does add to the scope of all of this and is 100% necessary info.
Haven't read the whole thread, but I think this might answer your question? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=846683.0 . (he abused his default trust status and defended it by trying to play the victim)  Edit; Looks like it was that thread, I think, and Theymos was the one that removed him. I could be wrong though, this is from almost 5 months later: If TECSHARE doesn't deserve Default Trust, almost nobody does. Especially not that begging, hectoring collectivist Bitchnellski.
He's not in defaulttrust? Nope. I was removed over a single negative trust rating dispute. Of course this is acceptable for people like Vod, but not any one else. I also got to be the VERY FIRST test case for trust exclusions (amazing the timing of the creation of this "feature"). Theymos excluded me over this, basically in effect putting a permanent cap on my trust ranking and nuking 3 years of hard earned trust, because no matter how many people trust me, Theymos will always rank higher. So if some one who trusts me also trusts the default trust, then I become untrusted. Of course, Theymos does not moderate trust ratings! So if some one who trusts me also trusts the default trust, then I become untrusted.
That's not how it works. If someone adds you directly to their trust list, then no exclusions will cause you to be removed. Your constant obsessive ramblings about this prove that you don't belong in the default trust network. It does in fact cascade down the default trust and make sure only people who explicitly add me or do not add default trust, trust me, and even then those people who trust me do not factor into my own trust rating score. You for some reason felt it was appropriate to nuke my years worth of trust earned for a single trust rating you personally did not approve of in addition to removing me from the default trust (which I never once asked to be on BTW, and still don't want to). After all you do not moderate trust right? I get removing me from the default trust list, that is fine if the rules are the same for everybody, but if you do not moderate trust ratings why did you exclude me, harming my trust score, because of a single rating I left that you demanded I remove but I refused? That sure seems like moderation of the trust to me. I tried to have a private discussion with you, but you are unwilling to communicate with me, turning me to the general public of the forum. Trust exclusions are just a back door way for you and the highest ranking in the trust to take quiet retribution upon contributing members who have worked to build their reputations while not taking responsibility for it because no one really sees it, unlike a trust rating where you have to explain yourself and everyone can see it. |
|
|
|
TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
|
February 08, 2020, 04:57:10 AM |
|
I will leave it to Vod to substantiate the claim from Theymos; *edit, thanks nut*
and the reason for your initial removal from DT is still unanswered.... I don't know that history.
I appreciate your answer, can you tell me if there is post history between you and these persons I could easily look up to verify it? around what dates should I look for those posts? (helps narrow it down when I go to look, unless you link me)
These are my thoughts. thus far..... need more information^^^
Thank you for the respect; it goes a long way.
Any claims of discourse in the form of PM's; well.... idk how to approach that as its in the realm of "manipulable" in my book, so it doesn't carry much weight of evidence unless an admin verifies it. (no way to be in cahoots with another party when its archived public, or admin verified private data)
Yeah I remember all the stuff going on in the turkish board bleeding into meta as well;
I did open my mouth in a few threads with some accusations based on merit abuse and gave my opinion, then later on some based on DT abuse, and several of the accused were Turkish members whom have banned alts.... yet were(are?) on DT using an alt when they should be excommunicated/expunged... I remember looking at them and on at least 4 of them: the evidence was solid against the accused.
so....
It was a sticky situation [as it is developing to be right about this sentence], and my main commenting in those threads was focused on how insane and misplaced many of the words from wolwoo were... he was straight up defending obvious ban evaders using this logic; "they are turkish that you accuse and everyone is attacking turkish", not acknowledging the truth of the facts presented by the accuser of x situation (there were over 6). To wolwoo the facts be damned, he wanted to be able to spread merit and be on DT.... and have us be ok with attacking people in a very extreme manner just for something as simple as questioning the motive of his actions/words in the slightest.
There were many things going on right at that same time....
*edit* thanks nutildah. Well taken. I carry his sentiment, backed up by my statements on wolwoo. Doesn't mean im against him, its just, not in a position of power with that loose of a "verbal grounds" so to speak. To each their own, but the greater part of society can't stand it from what I have seen over the years.
Still most curious as to how you lost DT the first time Tecshare? (were you ever on DT? i don't wanna assume anything at this point) It does add to the scope of all of this and is 100% necessary info.
I explained myself. Can you explain why you think the burden of proof should be on me to prove my innocence and not Vod and friends to prove my guilt? I don't find it productive to persue this line of questioning because it was intentionally designed to be something murky and unable to be substantiated in the hope that I would never be able to prove my innocence to anyone's satisfaction. They are making claims about my intent and character I have by design no way of proving. Requiring me to some how prove what happened in my mind is asinine. Just because they have a story in their head they want to spread in no way means there aren't tons of very legitimate reasons why I did what I did. I shouldn't have to defend myself from every concoction people lob at me based on nothing but creative writing skills and suspicion. As you can see the same group of people making the accusations there are here attempting to maintain their fictional narrative in a sad attempt at using the trust system as a tool of retribution for not agreeing with them. I was originally removed from the default trust (back when it was centralized) as detailed here. It was all based on a single rating I left for a user, who later turned out to be running a fraudulent charity. This is the event that caused many of the current posse of antagonists such as Vod to target me. I pointed out how the rules are arbitrarily enforced and how he does far more than I ever did on a regular basis as far as what they called abuse, he didn't like it, and began a years long effort to utilize the trust system to fight his petty vendettas. My reputability as far as trade was never once in question, this was all a targeted attack from day one. I would also remind you, that Theymos no longer excludes me, but he does in fact exclude Vod. If the fact Theymos didn't want me on default trust 6 years ago is relevant, then surely it is just as relevant that he doesn't want Vod on the default trust currently. |
|
|
|
|
JaredKaragen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1166
My AR-15 ID's itself as a toaster. Want breakfast?
|
|
February 08, 2020, 05:22:00 AM
Last edit: February 08, 2020, 05:56:07 AM by JaredKaragen |
|
Yeah; this is a big deal. If it was unintended you you to be back on DT TEC.... well; no worries... shit happens. I have to keep in mind Theymos is the one up on the pedestal (as he was put and is).... He has that power to set status quo..... and we should respect his words. Shit rolls down hill; so, this is a no-brainer in the land of logic.
If vod as well, has reason to believe you should not be on DT because of the negatives in dealing with you or is certain you are not to be on DT as per Theymos; well... I see his intentions in giving you that flag.
Does it fit the verbatim use of the trust flags? not exactly how I personally interpret them as to be used.
Does it return things to the status quo? yes.
Do I agree with it based on these facts? sadly yes... because we lack a better system to readjust for now and i need to read further to want to change status quo.
Tec, I hope you understand my reasoning. I know you do good things, I have seen you do them. Don't let all of this phase you; its just water under a bridge. (shit, look at my recent neg trust flag; it was a retalitory flag, wherein mine was based on evidence of a dev likely to not follow through and be associated with a group whom ran off with investments and never produced. It happens to us all; If I ever make a bad call: Ill come eat some crow with you)
I'm gonna try and shut my mouth at this point as I don't wanna do any speculation.... that does nobody any good, so ill try and keep out of it for now, since I think I have seen logical reasoning.
I hope my words meant something.
*edit* TECSHARE; I see your response. This pretty much explains a lot since there is no burden of proof needed for theymos saying you should not be on DT for [reasons above], as well as others agreeing it was so and with the decision.
I will look into that link and chase it back as far as I can. Thank you.
Vod being excluded presently, and you not?
Interesting.
Also interesting that you mention a trust system abuse issue.
hmmm..... it will take me a while to browse your pre 2014 (that thread start) post history to put it into context. I speed read it and i see your point. Makes me wanna read back and put context to their reasoning.
I appreciate your patience with me.... and hope you understand my thought process as I am laying it out.
Its hard to sus things out sometimes; don't want to chance misleading myself.
*edit#2: "Just because you think a person not answering as to how they are making a profit; doesn't mean you should abuse a system of power to punish them for your belief." This is the synopsis of your DT exclusion I can gather in the fewest words by browsing many pages and trying to figure out where friendly memes/banter and seriousness begin.
You are historically trustworthy, yes.
You are historically honest, yes... you even admitting to your mistake goes in hand with this TEC. I see this; trust me I do.... but the weight they put on abuse of a position of power (unlike the recent impeachment articles forgive my political poke of a pun), I believe was correct as its a zero tolerance kind of thing in my book. If I delegate some power to someone and if they break that trust and abuse it... Its end of the line for that power for them IRL.
I respect you dude... but... yeah I see now.
Its all in all rough cookie; as for right now's edition; was it technically a misuse of trust to..... shit....
Recently I have given neg feedback associated with supporting datum...
*JK resumes his silence understanding more of the scope of the situation*
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
February 08, 2020, 05:22:14 AM |
|
All of TECSHAREs outrage over something trust related threads are variations on the same theme that have been going on for well over half a decade now. This is ridiculous. (I'm just finding the thread now) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=853522.msg10909003#msg10909003The real question is, why did Theymos feel it was necessary to have me excluded even though I am already removed from the default trust list? Why is it necessary for these exclusions to cascade down the default trust tree instead of just removing me from Theymos's personal trust? If the trust is not moderated, then why is the ADMIN of the site punishing me with an exclusion for a trust rating as some one not on the default trust any longer? I understood not removing my rating for Armis would result in my removal from the default trust list, but I didn't care about that as much as I cared about the staff attempting to extort me into removing it with threats of removal, so I let them remove me.
Unhappy that I dared to have an opinion of my own Theymos then added a brand new feature just for me |
|
|
|
TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
|
February 08, 2020, 05:54:36 AM |
|
Yeah; this is a big deal. If it was unintended you you to be back on DT TEC.... well; no worries... shit happens. I have to keep in mind Theymos is the one up on the pedestal (as he was put and is).... He has that power to set status quo..... and we should respect his words. Shit rolls down hill; so, this is a no-brainer in the land of logic.
If vod as well, has reason to believe you should not be on DT because of the negatives in dealing with you or is certain you are not to be on DT as per Theymos; well... I see his intentions in giving you that flag.
Does it fit the verbatim use of the trust flags? not exactly how I personally interpret them as to be used.
Does it return things to the status quo? yes.
Do I agree with it based on these facts? sadly yes... because we lack a better system to readjust for now and i need to read further to want to change status quo.
Tec, I hope you understand my reasoning. I know you do good things, I have seen you do them. Don't let all of this phase you; its just water under a bridge. (shit, look at my recent neg trust flag; it was a retalitory flag, wherein mine was based on evidence of a dev likely to not follow through and be associated with a group whom ran off with investments and never produced. It happens to us all; If I ever make a bad call: Ill come eat some crow with you)
I'm gonna try and shut my mouth at this point as I don't wanna do any speculation.... that does nobody any good, so ill try and keep out of it for now, since I think I have seen logical reasoning.
I hope my words meant something.
*edit* TECSHARE; I see your response. This pretty much explains a lot since there is no burden of proof needed for theymos saying you should not be on DT for [reasons above], as well as others agreeing it was so and with the decision.
I will look into that link and chase it back as far as I can. Thank you.
Vod being excluded presently, and you not?
Interesting.
Also interesting that you mention a trust system abuse issue.
hmmm..... it will take me a while to browse your pre 2014 (that thread start) post history to put it into context. I speed read it and i see your point. Makes me wanna read back and put context to their reasoning.
I appreciate your patience with me.... and hope you understand my thought process as I am laying it out.
Its hard to sus things out sometimes; don't want to chance misleading msyself.
I appreciate you taking the time to review the issue. Unfortunately this type of dog piling and mobbing behavior has a distinct chilling effect against anyone speaking out against this type of behavior. That is in fact their intent targeting me, to make an example of people who criticize them in public so no one else will. This unfortunately includes when they act abusively and then no one wants to speak up about it for fear of being targeted themselves like this. This is their whole method of operation that allows this abuse to be perpetrated continually, and why I have been such a vocal opponent of trust system abuse, as I was one of the prototypical targets of it. |
|
|
|
|
TwitchySeal
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2716
Merit: 2093
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
|
|
February 08, 2020, 06:21:04 AM |
|
I have been such a vocal opponent of trust system abuse, as I was one of the prototypical targets of it.
You can keep playing the victim card all you want, but you were one of the first people to abuse the trust system.  And you've continued to do it ever since (it's been almost 5.5 years): Yeah, for the last few weeks he has been putting aside his morals and belief structure to get back on DT. He stopped distrusting everyone and started trusting many others, hoping for retaliatory trust. It was a good example for Theymos to see just how easily idiots can get on DT right now. This is correct. TECSHARE has been trying to get reciprocal inclusions for a few months now. Its finally paid off. The DT1s that he has nothing in common with except for reciprocal inclusions are: WhiteManWhite (Russian local board poster) Kalemder (Turkish local board poster) bobita (Turkish local board poster) Matthias9515 (Turkish local board poster) (left a positive trust for TS on 6/29, was added by TS a month later, during the first week that Matthias was on DT1) mhanbostanci (Turkish local board poster) He's never interacted with these users as they all post exclusively on their local boards (except when they make the exception to visit Meta or Reputation to address trust-related issues). I'm going to assume that he doesn't speak enough Russian or Turkish to understand the ratings left by these users and (for the most part) they don't speak enough English to understand his, and the only reason he included them was to gain enough votes to be back out of the negatives on DT. Without them, he would be back at -4. He also included two other Turkish posters soon after they were added to DT1, PHI1618 and by rallier whom he subsequently dropped (I imagine it was for not getting the reciprocal trust he was hoping for) He's still waiting for Vispilio to reciprocate, probably unaware that he just fell off DT1 for not having the minimum number of inclusions. Outside of OP's issue with ABitNut, this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be discouraged in the DT system. As a wise man once said: Your constant obsessive ramblings about this prove that you don't belong in the default trust network.
|
|
|
|
Vod
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 3166
Licking my boob since 1970
|
|
February 08, 2020, 11:04:21 AM |
|
I've been the target of his finger for almost 5.5 years. I'd be curious what percentage of Techy's posts contain my name. :/
Thank you JaredKaragen for bring attention to my two negative trust entries against the OP. Is the general consensus they are valid?
I have stated who I trust, and I won't be making major changes soon. I have to finish a gift I think the community needs and will really enjoy.
|
|
|
|
marlboroza
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1932
Merit: 2272
|
|
February 08, 2020, 12:15:36 PM
Last edit: February 08, 2020, 08:11:53 PM by marlboroza |
|
More people are accusing Techy - not just me.
I was thinking exactly this, it wasn't demand, no. I stand corrected. which Techy will focus on and attack you. :/
Then I will correct him. 5 years? I really think he is pissed because he abused trust and got kicked out of DT and he wants to get in again and while some users don't really observe account and they see his post as they are, some other users will point hypocrisy and other things and this is just getting him more and more pissed and one step back from DT. So this whole thing and drama around him is because he desperately wants to get back in DT, showing very bad judgement in process, doing whatever he needs to do to get in. It is just sad.
I really feel sorry for him. I would have suggested you @Vod to remove -ve ratings but then he is going to lie and accuse you that you removed it because you are trying to silence him, of course, if you don't remove it you are silencing him again  so I won't suggest anything. Drama never ends. I think I am out of this thread. |
|
|
|
|
TECSHARE (OP)
In memoriam
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
|
|
February 08, 2020, 12:19:22 PM |
|
I've been the target of his finger for almost 5.5 years. I'd be curious what percentage of Techy's posts contain my name. :/
Thank you JaredKaragen for bring attention to my two negative trust entries against the OP. Is the general consensus they are valid?
I have stated who I trust, and I won't be making major changes soon. I have to finish a gift I think the community needs and will really enjoy. Who you trust is irrelevant to accusations you make being valid. I know you want this wrapped up before anyone looks too close, I expect another accusation to encourage a topic slide any time now. I thought I might also add this: This has nothing to do with risk. It is the principal of the matter. He shouldn't have been doing what he was doing in the first place. He was provided many opportunities to leave or diffuse the situation, instead every step of the way he chose to escalate. I have already taken several steps to deescalate this situation. He has taken none. I feel I have zero obligations to compromise with him in any way, especially since he has demonstrated he is unwilling to do so when offered. Instead he opted to dictate to me what he wants done. He has no leverage at this point. Regardless of this I am again stating I am open to deleting his feedback if he removes his posts in my op, locks this thread, and deletes me from his signature. He can learn to act like an adult or live with my feedback. Its his choice. That's fair. I would react the same way. Interesting. You seemed to agree my rating for Armis was valid and my reaction reasonable enough that you would have done the same. Others also reinforce the idea that trust ratings are not moderated and my rating was thus valid, but the trust system has always been an evolving system with constantly changing metrics and rules which aren't written anywhere. In this case I was used as an example and demonized as others were allowed to leave these sorts of ratings regularly which was what lead me to believe the rating was a valid use. This forums users want to only hold certain people accountable as they excuse others. This is why I have strongly advocated for clear metrics based on observable instances of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws for leaving negative ratings. Expecting people to follow arbitrarily enforced and unwritten rules is not only asinine but morally wrong, because there is no way to obey them even if you try. It is just a matter of some one who is popular enough coming along to accuse you. A two months after my criticism of Vod and the double standards he enjoys in that thread: Vod 16: -0 / +9(9) 2015-01-06 0.00000000 "Constantly posts lies about me in an effort to have me removed from the default trust list. Honest discussion is one thing, but he just posts BS with absolutely no basis.
Not trustworthy."Your first negative rating on my account, which you were eventually forced to remove because the community judged it invalid. Seems a lot like you, from the start, simply didn't like me criticizing you and thought that was justification for leaving me a negative rating. Seems unfair I get such a harsh punishment for something once Vod has been doing to me freely for years doesn't it? I thought so too. This in context you can see he is making a point that he can freely abuse the trust system exactly in the way I was punished harshly for as he accuses me for the same, because that is the kind of guy Vod is. |
|
|
|
|
JaredKaragen
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1166
My AR-15 ID's itself as a toaster. Want breakfast?
|
|
February 09, 2020, 04:42:33 AM |
|
I've been the target of his finger for almost 5.5 years. I'd be curious what percentage of Techy's posts contain my name. :/
Thank you JaredKaragen for bring attention to my two negative trust entries against the OP. Is the general consensus they are valid?
I have stated who I trust, and I won't be making major changes soon. I have to finish a gift I think the community needs and will really enjoy.
I think in simplest forms for the recent neg trust that I analyzed: If we hold Theymos to be on a pedistal of "my word is law"... then; TEC can not be on DT. It was the easiest way for him to be removed back then, and since things are vastly different on the forum now; Assuming the above about theymos is to be held as law: your action continue that state of status quo by giving him that flag could be interpreted as ok; even though the flag system itself is to warn people about being scammed, ripped off or mislead (on the same level) by the individual getting the flag. If I am misinterpreting what the flag system is for; please correct me now.... but this is how I see it to be used. My recent red flag was to warn of a developer of a project that has mass investment, only to ignore the investors and produce nothing except losses. I see this as a reason to give the trust hit... I admit, I need to go back, and do my own little but more of digging on it as well; but the facts stood up to him being connected to such a thing. This is why; Its not a valid flag "prima face", but it is deemed necessary to return the status quo. IF the above is not correct... well.... You know my feelings by now I would think. I'm not sure about the second trust flag; as I don't think I even looked into it.... I myself removed myself from default trust and only have people added that I have personally done transactions/personal dealings with; or have never steered me wrong. As an outsider.... Its a tough thing to sort all of this out. But at least now I know; and TBH: I do feel for everyone involved in this. Hopefully... something amicable can come around. It has been nearly 6 years... The odds are in your favor for things to change for the better. |
|
|
|
|
