Topic: 270 trust.7 trust.3 trust compared to minus 128 trust (Read 1043 times)
they abuses trust feedback without any probleme nothign you can do about it
@cryptohunter i just copy and past your signature and hope its ok since i'm lazy to create currently an own one.
Hope its ok for you since i guess soon somebody is going to claim you or me are being alts
Hope its ok for you since i guess soon somebody is going to claim you or me are being alts
Were you looking in the mirror when you asked?
Would you like a cookie?
Quote
You have just publicly admitted that the feedback you left is false to use my reaction to "prove your point".
I have admitted tagging you for your past actions and that i have no proof that you are a scammer.The tagg is based on my opinion which these DT members do daily.
Also your doubt is irrelevant.It would take an admin 1 minute to see if my claim is legit or not.
And to answer your questions proof has been provided that many people make these mistakes on bitcointalk forum which are mainly from germany but also some neighbour countries make the same mistakes.
You should watch threads of people demanding to tagg DT members for the same kind of evidence you declare yourself as enough where ALL DT members deny to tagg another DT member calling it not as any hard evidence.
Its called a double standard.Something what bitcointalk always tried to avoid has now been implementent as standard which suchmoon even openly admitted.
@cryptohunter i just copy and past your signature and hope its ok since i'm lazy to create currently an own one.
Hope its ok for you since i guess soon somebody is going to claim you or me are being alts
You are more than welcome.
Yep I guess anyone whom gets unfairly tagged with red trust is going to be accused of being my alt soon.
Quote
You have just publicly admitted that the feedback you left is false to use my reaction to "prove your point".
I have admitted tagging you for your past actions and that i have no proof that you are a scammer.The tagg is based on my opinion which these DT members do daily.
Also your doubt is irrelevant.It would take an admin 1 minute to see if my claim is legit or not.
And to answer your questions proof has been provided that many people make these mistakes on bitcointalk forum which are mainly from germany but also some neighbour countries make the same mistakes.
You should watch threads of people demanding to tagg DT members for the same kind of evidence you declare yourself as enough where ALL DT members deny to tagg another DT member calling it not as any hard evidence.
Its called a double standard.Something what bitcointalk always tried to avoid has now been implementent as standard which suchmoon even openly admitted.
@cryptohunter i just copy and past your signature and hope its ok since i'm lazy to create currently an own one.
Hope its ok for you since i guess soon somebody is going to claim you or me are being alts
The doubt or no doubt in your mind over this matter is totally irrelevant and of no importance compared to hard proof that some members get red trust presenting facts regarding the wrong doing and untrustworthy deeds of DT members or encouraging others to examine these facts. Please understand that.
You do not have absolute proof in this case.
In commonwealth civil litigation the test is "on the balance of probabilities" meaning "more likely than not." In my opinion it easily meets that test.
In your opinion meets that threshold.
I have PROOF. In black and white. There is no need for opinion.
I am referring to DT being used as a weapon to silence persons presenting facts regarding wrong doing and untrustworthy deeds. This other case that in your opinion meets that threshold.. is a grey area for red trust in the first place.
An opinion of a threshold of a probability of a grey area ..........sounds all a bit weak sauce.
The doubt or no doubt in your mind over this matter is totally irrelevant and of no importance compared to hard proof that some members get red trust presenting facts regarding the wrong doing and untrustworthy deeds of DT members or encouraging others to examine these facts. Please understand that.
You do not have absolute proof in this case.
In commonwealth civil litigation the test is "on the balance of probabilities" meaning "more likely than not." In my opinion it easily meets that test.
Quote
...and you complain about feedback left by the DTs when you leave false feedback yourself.
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
I have never defended false feeďback. On the contrary. I have often approached DTs that have left incorrect feedback via PM and discussed their feedback which has often resulted in removal of their feedback.
You have just publicly admitted that the feedback you left is false. I'll let it sink in for a while. http://archive.fo/rrYWw
Also stop bullshitting about your alt. You have made all the exact spelling and grammatical mistakes with your alt that your thule account makes.
There is a difference between making a mistake with a feedback and deliberately placing false ratings.
Also there is not doubt in my mind that the feedback Suchmoon left is true and that you are lying that it is not your alt. The alt makes every spelling and grammatical mistake you usually make At least half a dozen of them.. There is no other active account that I am aware of on the entire bitcointalk that makes the exact same combination of errors.
The doubt or no doubt in your mind over this matter is totally irrelevant and of no importance compared to hard proof that some members get red trust presenting facts regarding the wrong doing and untrustworthy deeds of DT members or encouraging others to examine these facts. Please understand that.
You do not have absolute proof in this case.
Quote
...and you complain about feedback left by the DTs when you leave false feedback yourself.
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
I have never defended false feeďback. On the contrary. I have often approached DTs that have left incorrect feedback via PM and discussed their feedback which has often resulted in removal of their feedback.
You have just publicly admitted that the feedback you left is false to use my reaction to "prove your point". I'll let it sink in for a while. http://archive.fo/rrYWw
Also stop bullshitting about your alt. You have made all the exact spelling and grammatical mistakes with your alt that your thule account makes.
There is a difference between making a mistake with a feedback and deliberately placing false ratings.
Also there is not doubt in my mind that the feedback Suchmoon left is true and that you are lying that it is not your alt. The alt makes every spelling and grammatical mistake you usually make At least half a dozen of them.. There is no other active account that I am aware of on the entire bitcointalk that makes the exact same combination of errors.
Quote
The evidence is good enough for me.
You just proofed you used the negative feedback without factual evidence and just based on your own opinion.
THANK YOU.Case Closed
What was the factual evidence icomarketing being me ?Oh i forgat you first negative tagged him and after that tried to find any sort of evidence which didn't worked out.And you still keep on your own opinion about that negative trust since you didn't provided any real evidence just a poor assumption.
You're suprisingly concerned about somebody who's supposedly not you. The evidence is good enough for me. If it's not good enough for you - you know what to do.
You're also confused as to the purpose of trust ratings. You seem to be posting them to make yourself feel good and that's part of the reason why they're bullshit and useless for anyone else.
Well, I would say that DT's abusing the trust system or even using it to silence whilst blowers regarding their prior untrustworthy deeds is far worse and devalues the system far more.
I have proof. You do not.
What was the factual evidence icomarketing being me ?Oh i forgat you first negative tagged him and after that tried to find any sort of evidence which didn't worked out.And you still keep on your own opinion about that negative trust since you didn't provided any real evidence just a poor assumption.
You're suprisingly concerned about somebody who's supposedly not you. The evidence is good enough for me. If it's not good enough for you - you know what to do.
You're also confused as to the purpose of trust ratings. You seem to be posting them to make yourself feel good and that's part of the reason why they're bullshit and useless for anyone else.
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
The ratings you received from DT members are factual and have references, even if you disagree that the facts presented require red trust.
The ratings you're sending out are bullshit with no references and no factual basis.
LOL same for DT's red trusting me.
Red trust is not supposed to be used to silence persons highlighting prior wrongdoing and untrustworthy deeds of DT members.
I mean they are reversing the intentional purpose for which DT was initiated.
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
The ratings you received from DT members are factual and have references, even if you disagree that the facts presented require red trust.
The ratings you're sending out are bullshit with no references and no factual basis.
Thats your own personal opinion.You said yourself multiple times the trust system is no trading or scammer feedback and that its allowed to add own opinions into the trust system.
Quote
The ratings you received from DT members are factual and have references
What was the factual evidence icomarketing being me ?Oh i forgat you first negative tagged him and after that tried to find any sort of evidence which didn't worked out.And you still keep on your own opinion about that negative trust since you didn't provided any real evidence just a poor assumption.But i'll tell you something since i'm a good member of that board i will instantly remove that negative feedback once you show real proof of your claim that icomarketing is an alt of quicksilver or me for which you tagged him.
Will love to see these so called hard factual evidences
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
The ratings you received from DT members are factual and have references, even if you disagree that the facts presented require red trust.
The ratings you're sending out are bullshit with no references and no factual basis.
Quote
...and you complain about feedback left by the DTs when you leave false feedback yourself.
Why you claim i complain ?Didin't i just proofed that you complain when the same thing just happened to you directly ?
You got a negativ feedback for your past actions.I never said you are a scammer.Based on these DT members its enough to be untrustworthy in their opinion.
I just did to you which actions you defended of other DT members.So why do you complain and post now about false feedback when you defend at the same time the false feedbacks of DT members telling its their right to have their own opinion?
Seems hypocritical to me.
Ok since you claim your trust system is so great and is showing real input please THEYMOS explain to me this
270 positiv trust for TMAN
Proofen of extorition https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757
Merit Cycle and many other staff
7 Trust for the pharmacist
Proofen of posting racist comments for signature campaign profit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17808231
Merit cycle and many more staff
3 Trust for Lauda
Proofen of extorition https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757
Merit Cycle and MANY MANY other staff
-128 (yesterday -158) for thule
Proofen of trying to buy an account for service thread which rules on this forum clearly allowed (without informing about discourage) and a mod confirming to be allowed to buy an account
Dare to raise his voice against this negative tagg which resulted into a massiv negativ feedback
Please someone explain to me which one of these actions of these four people did the least harm to the forum
270 positiv trust for TMAN
Proofen of extorition https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757
Merit Cycle and many other staff
7 Trust for the pharmacist
Proofen of posting racist comments for signature campaign profit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.17808231
Merit cycle and many more staff
3 Trust for Lauda
Proofen of extorition https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757
Merit Cycle and MANY MANY other staff
-128 (yesterday -158) for thule
Proofen of trying to buy an account for service thread which rules on this forum clearly allowed (without informing about discourage) and a mod confirming to be allowed to buy an account
Dare to raise his voice against this negative tagg which resulted into a massiv negativ feedback
Please someone explain to me which one of these actions of these four people did the least harm to the forum
Thule - this is proof you have absolutely no standards or credibility at all when you leave feedback like this.
...and you complain about feedback left by the DTs when you leave false feedback yourself.
Proof it is factually untrue.
To the mod deleting instantly my posts which contain proof.At least have the gut and show yourself who you are and for what real reason you are deleting them
Exactly, go after mods, the most corrupt bunch of miscreants here that have nothing better to do than delete your serial posts. Next - merit sources because they don't give you merits, and usernames that don't start with "th" because why not.
What a fucking lunatic.
No your ignorace that at that time nearly noone new about the update that buying accounts will lead to a negative trust is the issue.
It was common practice on bitcointalk to buy and sell accounts without receiving any tagg.Legandaries did it any many other.
There was no announcement of change.
You just started tagging people without warning.
I wasn't even aware that there was a discussion about it as i never checked Meta.
I checked forum rules for that matter.
It was common practice on bitcointalk to buy and sell accounts without receiving any tagg.Legandaries did it any many other.
There was no announcement of change.
You just started tagging people without warning.
I wasn't even aware that there was a discussion about it as i never checked Meta.
I checked forum rules for that matter.
Jump to: