REMOVE NUBBINS FROM THE DEFAULT TRUST LIST FOR REPEATED TRUST ABUSE

[TECSHARE]

Techshare was removed by three staff members, (Badbear, SaltySpitoon, and I think Hilariousandco) from their Trust list after Theymos supposedly ordered them to do. (<--not exactly true)
Over the past month Techshare has accused Theymos, Badbear, Saltyspitoon, Hilariousandco, Vod, and many others of all plotting to ruin his online life.

I didn't remove him but a couple of the others did.

This is just a lie. I never accused Theymos, Badbear, Saltyspitoon, or you of trying to "ruin my online life" (a phrase I never once used ever). VOD abused the trust system to attempt to intimidate me into silence because I was speaking out about his own trust system abuse, and pointing out that the staff let him do this over and over, while people such as myself are removed over the most minor of individual incidents.

This happened after I was removed from the default trust by Canaryinthemine and Saltyspitoon, in salty's case he was given a directive from his EMPLOYER (Theymos) to remove me. When your employer asks you to do something, that is pretty much an order. If you want to see why I was REALLY removed from the default trust you can read about it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=853522.0
(here is another post for you to necro and off topic post all over smoothie)

[sorryforthat]

Does Thymos ever come in here and shed some light on a lot of this? It seems a lot of this could just come to an end if he would just come in and leave some type of input. The only people really speaking are those for one side or another which is more of a bias to the topic and the people involved. Is there no mediation?

[Welsh]

Does Thymos ever come in here and shed some light on a lot of this? It seems a lot of this could just come to an end if he would just come in and leave some type of input. The only people really speaking are those for one side or another which is more of a bias to the topic and the people involved. Is there no mediation?

He has almost certainly read the initial request and probably a bit of the discussion of this thread, if not all. He does give his input when it is needed you can verify this by visiting numerous meta threads. To be quite honest this particular instance doesn't need to be addressed by him. If he feels the need to pitch in I'm sure he will.

[TECSHARE]

I don't see anything about conspiracies in there, but I am sure hearing a lot about them in this thread. What is my supposed alias count now? 3, 4? It is what cowards around here do when they have no other arguments. Accuse you of something you can never disprove.

[SaltySpitoon]

This has been covered many times, to address the last 10 or so comments since this is about Nubbins and not Tecshare, so this thread can get back to what the OP is about. I was not "ordered" to remove Tecshare by Theymos, I recieved 7 Pms from different people telling me to check out the thread about and consider removing him from my trust list. Theymos too pmed Canaryinthemine and myself the meta link, asked that we read it, and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

That said, @Bitcoinexpress Tecshare is not jrretirement nor do I believe he is Woodcollector.

[sorryforthat]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

[ABitNut]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

But but but.... If Theymos (your "employer") recommends you basically have to obey... Right right? The whole premise is ridiculous to begin with and while it's good that SaltySpitoon came out to explicitly state this it is ridiculous that they had too....

<snip> What is my supposed alias count now? 3, 4? <snip>

You must be aware that your supposed alias count is officially over 9000, right? Your actual aliases... Are not really relevant for me.

[sorryforthat]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

But but but.... If Theymos (your "employer") recommends you basically have to obey... Right right? The whole premise is ridiculous to begin with and while it's good that SaltySpitoon came out to explicitly state this it is ridiculous that they had too....

As much as I dig the sarcasm, its not really the direction I was going. I did not say that they had to, just that the idea of anothers judgement could alter the direction toward the end result, from a psychological standpoint that is. This is just how we as human ideology works. How things are stated or presented have more impact on us and this is seen in every aspect of our lives from TV to Radio and what ever else you want to throw in the mix.

[SaltySpitoon]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

If I was simple minded maybe, I made a judgement for myself, which I've also addressed 50 times. Its not that in my opinion Tecshare is untrustworthy. I'd still trust Tecshare with my money in a trade, I however removed him from my trustlist because I don't trust him not to get upset and make an irrational unproportionate reactions to situations (My decision, not Theymos/Canaryinthemine/etc's decision). My positive feedback for him for past trades stands, I just don't trust him to leave appropriate feedback for others. Armis was mildly pestering his sales thread, no moderator responded either because they didn't feel it necessary, or they didn't get around to reading it, and the situation played out from there. As I've said in the Remove Nubbins/Vod/etc etc threads in meta, I don't care because Nubbins/Vod aren't my responsibility, as I don't have either of them on my trust network. Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

[sorryforthat]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

If I was simple minded maybe, I made a judgement for myself, which I've also addressed 50 times. Its not that in my opinion Tecshare is untrustworthy. I'd still trust Tecshare with my money in a trade, I however removed him from my trustlist because I don't trust him not to get upset and make an irrational unproportionate reactions to situations (My decision, not Theymos/Canaryinthemine/etc's decision). My positive feedback for him for past trades stands, I just don't trust him to leave appropriate feedback for others. Armis was mildly pestering his sales thread, no moderator responded either because they didn't feel it necessary, or they didn't get around to reading it, and the situation played out from there. As I've said in the Remove Nubbins/Vod/etc etc threads in meta, I don't care because Nubbins/Vod aren't my responsibility, as I don't have either of them on my trust network. Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

That makes a lot of sense. I in no way meant to make it seem like you were simple minded or the sort. The way you outlined it makes this less personal and more of a honest decision. I understand this a lot better now and its by reading threads like this that allow a better understanding for me on the trust system and even your post alone kind of makes a lot of points in this thread moot when it comes to the removal of persons from default trusts and what not. Thank you for your response.

[BadBear]

and said, "I'd recommend removing Tecshare" with no underlying threat or anything else. There was not a threat of removal from Default trust by Theymos to Canaryinthemine or myself.

But isn't this kind of a nudge in that direction? That statement alone would linger in your mind before you even took a look at the meta thread that was sent from Thymos. It could be said that this aided a decision before facts were even placed in front of you.

But but but.... If Theymos (your "employer") recommends you basically have to obey... Right right? The whole premise is ridiculous to begin with and while it's good that SaltySpitoon came out to explicitly state this it is ridiculous that they had too....

Sad thing is he has said it before, multiple times.
Tecshare ignores it all and says the same thing over and over, and by now most have given up responding to it (incident in question was almost 3 months ago, and he attacks those who do). This style of argument is an informal fallacy commonly known as proof by assertion, typically used by politicians, lawyers, and ad agencies. Sadly it is fairly effective, since most of us are kept busy with the forum.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

I don't think Tecshare is doing it intentionally though, maybe he is, I don't know.  I think he just has such a high opinion of himself (wish search wasn't down, I've seen some doozies that make this obvious) that he can't bear to think someone may have chosen to remove him from their trust list, and instead chooses to believe it's a collaborative effort by *the man* to damage him. I've seen it many times in various forms, this type of denial is kind of sad to see.

[BitcoinEXpress]

I don't think Tecshare is doing it intentionally though, maybe he is, I don't know.  I think he just has such a high opinion of himself (wish search wasn't down, I've seen some doozies that make this obvious) that he can't bear to think someone may have chosen to remove him from their trust list, and instead chooses to believe it's a collaborative effort by *the man* to damage him. I've seen it many times in various forms, this type of denial is kind of sad to see.

Isn't this just a very educated, eloquent and politically correct way of saying what I said a couple of weeks ago?


~BCX~

Wow is all I can say.

Hands down all I can say is Tecshare has clearly demonstrated the most severe pathology of being butt hurt than I ever encountered.

All of these threads and psychotic whining is for one thing and one thing only.

His ego cannot accept the fact he was removed from the trust and badly wants back in.

Techshare is massive butthurt.

Anyone else see that?


~BCX~

[TECSHARE]

Sad thing is he has said it before, multiple times.
Tecshare ignores it all and says the same thing over and over, and by now most have given up responding to it (incident in question was almost 3 months ago, and he attacks those who do). This style of argument is an informal fallacy commonly known as proof by assertion, typically used by politicians, lawyers, and ad agencies. Sadly it is fairly effective, since most of us are kept busy with the forum.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

I don't think Tecshare is doing it intentionally though, maybe he is, I don't know.  I think he just has such a high opinion of himself (wish search wasn't down, I've seen some doozies that make this obvious) that he can't bear to think someone may have chosen to remove him from their trust list, and instead chooses to believe it's a collaborative effort by *the man* to damage him. I've seen it many times in various forms, this type of denial is kind of sad to see.

Nepotism requires no collaborative effort, it is perfectly organic. People who your pals get a pass, everyone else gets the shaft. Simple as that. There needs to be no coordinated conspiracy. Additionally, you say "I" keep bringing it up, but who brought it up here? Wasn't me, it was people trying to discredit me using that as some sort of supposed proof.

I keep repeating myself, because staff repeatedly use words referring to my viewpoints such as "conspiracy" to make my assertions seem wild, theoretical, and unrealistic in an attempt to marginalize me and keep people from critically examining my words, and they never stop repeating themselves either at any opportunity.

For about the 1000th time, I don't give a shit about being on the default trust. It is a horrible, destructive, completely ineffective system. If I did why didn't I just remove my rating for Armis so I could stay on it? If that is what I wanted I could have had it. My problem is with the way the staff CLAIM to handle trust disputes and how they ACTUALLY handle trust disputes are two very different things. People like VOD, and Nubbins are allowed to shit all over everyone's reputations, often destroying them in one post, for very clearly personal reasons OVER AND OVER again, but the fact that supposedly abused the trust system once was enough for Theymos himself to rally other staff members, and have me removed.

As far as Salty, Theymos pays his bills. Why would SaltySpitoon not follow a directive from his boss? It is fairly obvious that if anyone was "asked" to do something by their employer, not doing so could potentially lead to loss of employment, if not other issues. You can claim up and down you weren't "forced" to, but your exact words to me were "I am not risking my reputation for you" demonstrating to me you very clearly had something to lose simply by not removing me. So in the end, is that a choice or a mandate?

[danielpbarron]

default trust. It is a horrible, destructive, completely ineffective system.

You're right for once. It's absurd that new users start off trusting people they know nothing about. The whole thing is designed poorly; the "btc risked" value should be replaced with a general score; it should be a "Web of Trust" and not a "Web of Trades." I trust least of all, the users with hundreds of ratings about petty trades; it's almost as though you were buying ratings from each other.

There should be no such thing as a neutral rating; if a rating isn't negative, it's positive. Neutrality is the absence of a rating. Making a rating is like placing a bet, with your reputation instead of money. Old ratings carry more weight than new ratings, just like how early bets are weighted higher than late bets. For example: a negative rating for pirateat40 in 2011 is more valuable than one placed in 2012. It's easy to call someone a scammer after everyone has already agreed he is a scammer. It's risky to call someone a scammer when everyone else is still blind to his deception.

Or better yet, just use the #bitcoin-assets WoT.

[Keyser Soze]

Nepotism requires no collaborative effort, it is perfectly organic. People who your pals get a pass, everyone else gets the shaft. Simple as that. There needs to be no coordinated conspiracy. Additionally, you say "I" keep bringing it up, but who brought it up here? Wasn't me, it was people trying to discredit me using that as some sort of supposed proof.

I keep repeating myself, because staff repeatedly use words referring to my viewpoints such as "conspiracy" to make my assertions seem wild, theoretical, and unrealistic in an attempt to marginalize me and keep people from critically examining my words, and they never stop repeating themselves either at any opportunity.

For about the 1000th time, I don't give a shit about being on the default trust. It is a horrible, destructive, completely ineffective system. If I did why didn't I just remove my rating for Armis so I could stay on it? If that is what I wanted I could have had it. My problem is with the way the staff CLAIM to handle trust disputes and how they ACTUALLY handle trust disputes are two very different things. People like VOD, and Nubbins are allowed to shit all over everyone's reputations, often destroying them in one post, for very clearly personal reasons OVER AND OVER again, but the fact that supposedly abused the trust system once was enough for Theymos himself to rally other staff members, and have me removed.

As far as Salty, Theymos pays his bills. Why would SaltySpitoon not follow a directive from his boss? It is fairly obvious that if anyone was "asked" to do something by their employer, not doing so could potentially lead to loss of employment, if not other issues. You can claim up and down you weren't "forced" to, but your exact words to me were "I am not risking my reputation for you" demonstrating to me you very clearly had something to lose simply by not removing me. So in the end, is that a choice or a mandate?

I don't have anything to do with this but doesn't the below post explain the bolded above?

If I was simple minded maybe, I made a judgement for myself, which I've also addressed 50 times. Its not that in my opinion Tecshare is untrustworthy. I'd still trust Tecshare with my money in a trade, I however removed him from my trustlist because I don't trust him not to get upset and make an irrational unproportionate reactions to situations (My decision, not Theymos/Canaryinthemine/etc's decision). My positive feedback for him for past trades stands, I just don't trust him to leave appropriate feedback for others. Armis was mildly pestering his sales thread, no moderator responded either because they didn't feel it necessary, or they didn't get around to reading it, and the situation played out from there. As I've said in the Remove Nubbins/Vod/etc etc threads in meta, I don't care because Nubbins/Vod aren't my responsibility, as I don't have either of them on my trust network. Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

[BG4]

TecShare..    Why do you NOT have woodcollector on your trust list???

[smoothie]

I don't think Tecshare is doing it intentionally though, maybe he is, I don't know.  I think he just has such a high opinion of himself (wish search wasn't down, I've seen some doozies that make this obvious) that he can't bear to think someone may have chosen to remove him from their trust list, and instead chooses to believe it's a collaborative effort by *the man* to damage him. I've seen it many times in various forms, this type of denial is kind of sad to see.

Isn't this just a very educated, eloquent and politically correct way of saying what I said a couple of weeks ago?


~BCX~

Wow is all I can say.

Hands down all I can say is Tecshare has clearly demonstrated the most severe pathology of being butt hurt than I ever encountered.

All of these threads and psychotic whining is for one thing and one thing only.

His ego cannot accept the fact he was removed from the trust and badly wants back in.

Techshare is massive butthurt.

Anyone else see that?


~BCX~

It is very glaring that TECSHARE is butthurt.

 

[TECSHARE]

RE: Keyzer Soze

Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

Theymos, Badbear, and Hilariousandco took it upon themselves to lead the rallying cry to remove me.... even though they were not the ones who added me to their trust list, and they had no reason to respond, yet they did.

PS, back to the actual topic of this thread, why is it ok Nubbins has still not removed his negative trust rating for UKCrypto even though he has proved beyond a doubt that he is not an alt of WoodCollector? Isn't this just more punitive punishment using the default trust system to punish people who dare disagree with him?

[hilariousandco]

RE: Keyzer Soze

Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

Theymos, Badbear, and Hilariousandco took it upon themselves to lead the rallying cry to remove me.... even though they were not the ones who added me to their trust list, and they had no reason to respond, yet they did.

No I didn't. I had absolutely nothing to do with you being removed, but it was the right decision. You just didn't like that fact and because I was vocal about it.

[TECSHARE]

RE: Keyzer Soze

Its not subjective enforcement of the rules, its just that moderator's don't have Nubbins/Vod on their trust lists, so they have no reason to respond. (besides Badbear who has addressed his stance on Vod)

Theymos, Badbear, and Hilariousandco took it upon themselves to lead the rallying cry to remove me.... even though they were not the ones who added me to their trust list, and they had no reason to respond, yet they did.

No I didn't. I had absolutely nothing to do with you being removed, but it was the right decision. You just didn't like that fact and because I was vocal about it.

So you weren't posting over and over in that thread chastising me? Sure looked like you were. Also you personally contacted Canaryinthemine to ask him to review the thread did you not? That does not sound like no involvement to me.


PS, back to the actual topic of this thread, why is it ok Nubbins has still not removed his negative trust rating for UKCrypto even though he has proved beyond a doubt that he is not an alt of WoodCollector? Isn't this just more punitive punishment using the default trust system to punish people who dare disagree with him?