Please tell me what to do or in what topic I should write if I published a report on Ratimov and he left me an allegedly neutral negative review.
There is nothing to do. Neutral rating can be added for any reason.
It doesn't harm you. If you think it's incorrect/unfair... well, that reflects poorly on Ratimov then.
and if no one leaves him "Neutral feedback" then Ratimov will think that He got away with everything and will continue to leave false feedback.
Of course, suchmoon will defend poison-pen feedback that is “neutral” in form, but negative in substance.
She herself has a habit of issuing outright defamatory “neutral” feedback. Most infamously, she accused a decent forum member of being the alt of “a well-known scammer”—vaguely, without evidence, in “neutral” trust feedback. This caused serious harm to that person’s reputation; it started rumours that snowballed through gossip, until all the herd-mentality types
just knew it to be true. I don’t want to delve into that here, because that person has explicitly tried to avoid Reputation drama; but if you dig around a bit, you will see whereof I speak.
(And suchmoon should be the last person to complain about vague accusations brought without evidence.)Don’t just take my word for it. Do your own research.You can try creating a new thread in Reputation so that we can stop derailing this one, and recommend excluding Ratimov from trust lists, but I don't see that getting much support on the basis of one neutral rating.
Ratimov also left me a retaliatory red tag, a classic butthurt whine—after I left him negative trust feedback with evidence of business/trade-risk issues of interest to signature campaign managers, who may not want to be scammed into paying him to spam the forum with plagiarised articles laundered through Google Translate.
Are you serious? You are the "captain obvious", Since when is posting
evidence of plagiarism considered shitpost and trolling?
Timelord2067 has multiple tags (including my own) for his trolling. My suggestion is to not pay too much attention to his nonsense. He is so cracked that he once accused Lauda and marlboroza of being alts—well, that is not as stupid as some people’s accusation that I am Lauda’s alt.
(Just wait till you are accused of being my alt, and then you will have first-hand knowledge of how foolish these “people” are.)Protip: When Timelord uses the thumbs-down
message icon for one of his posts, it means that the post will definitely get a thumbs-down from anyone who is moderately intelligent and/or sane.
airfinex, you won the respect of some serious people for presenting
evidence against Ratimov. Whether or not you are really a “Newbie”, it is obvious that you do not have experience navigating these ridiculous Meta and Reputation fights. My advice:
- This discussion is off-topic here. Please direct any complaints about Ratimov’s bad tags to the Reputation forum.
- But you should not expect any kind of “justice”, or whatever. I don’t bother complaining about his stupid retaliatory red tag against me, as you can see; the only reason for me to do so is my mild curiosity about what other DTs will say about his trust system abuse. Surely, they will not be hypocrites?
- It may be productive to start a more general thread in Reputation, discussing whether or not Ratimov should be in DT. His plagiarism is a Meta issue, for two reasons: It should invoke staff action, and he is a merit source. His untrustworthy judgment and his trust system abuse are purely Reputation issues. I do suggest that right or wrong, as a practical matter, such a thread needs more impact than “oh no, he left a bad tag”. There are many such threads—some right, some wrong—to gain traction, a thread either needs to be very well-prepared, or needs to have pre-existing support from someone popular. (If a thread is made by someone popular, it will take off like a rocket even if it is only juvenile trash talk.)
- Understand that DT has all the refined dignity and intelligence of a schoolyard fight between children who want to be the most popular. There are (or have been) a few smart and judicious DTs, but not many... Set your expectations accordingly.
- If you are using this account to express yourself on controversial issues without fear of retaliation against your “main account”, then do it! Why do you care if Ratimov scribbles on your trust wall here? Do you intend to use this account for trading, or to enroll it in signature campaigns? Focus on your goals—and over time, others will see if your goals are honest. Remember always that in the eyes of anyone who has even the least bit of wisdom, reputation is hard to win, and easy to lose.
- I suggest using more professional language; and always stick to what you started with under this account: The evidence. It will drive certain parties crazy if you show that you are right, and they look foolish dismissing you as a “troll”.
Did s/he do something so special that you used him as an example in the last update of the Trust lists...?
