Topic: Abuse of negative trust – mr.relax - page 2. (Read 488 times)

He should read this:

I thought that this rule stands only for DT1. Thanks for correcting me (I'll edit now the other post too).
Then it was even easier. Indeed, this guy is no longer DT2. Problem solved.


I didn't tried to imply anything wrong about Buchi-88. I just tried to find a "quick fix" because I didn't know that the DT1 exclusion works in the same way on DT2.


You were correct. It's already done.

uh, you're really fast with this check. I did that distrust a few minutes ago 

Sincerely, I can't detail investigate this case because I don't know the German language, but I trust 1miau judgement.

examplens kinda sealed it up, they also excluded him, he's now (-2)

Exactly. If Buchi-88, as a DT1 member, keeps trusting mr.relax, it needs 2 DT1 exclusions for mr.relax to be kicked out from his DT2 position.
Accounts are DT2 as long as one DT1 inclusion is active and are kicked out if they have 1 more DT1 exclusion than DT1 inclusion.
As far as I know, maybe someone can confirm.  

---

Not anymore because if I'm correct, 1 DT1 inclusion makes him DT2 - and he needs 2 DT1 exclusions to be kicked out again. But before I created the topic, he only had 1 exclusion.

---

Yes, according to BPIP, NeuroticFish excluded him: https://bpip.org/TrustLog

It has been changed and he is not a DT member anymore.
If you go to this page, you will see this: mr.relax (-1)
Since neither you nor GazetaBitcoin are DT1 member now and only Nestade is a DT1 member, another DT1 member has excluded mr.relax.

Yes, probably he's not DT2 anymore, I've looked it up on wednesday and it might have changed by now. As far as I know, he's just one exclusion away from getting kicked out of DT2 since he has been distrusted by Nestade, GazetaBitcoin and me before the incident (see LoyceV's trust list viewer).

---

I've not even really insulted him, but he likes to paint himself as victim...  
Obviously he doesn't like it when his fraudulent tactics are criticized or his questionable positions in general.
It's quite funny because he has been the one pushing lies repeatedly like the unproven claim, that Nestade would be my alt and that my trust from November 2022 would be a negative trust.
He has even sent unsolicited and harsh PMs to other forum members.  


Exactly, there are so many disagrements. What a shitshow if we would start to give out a negative trust for disagreements for example in Bitcointalk's reputation section.  

Buchi-88 is a trustworthy member and it's just a coincidence.


Exactly but mr.relax is just 1 DT1 exclusion away from getting kicked out of DT2.
And the current DT selection is very favorable for mr.relax because normally, GazetaBitcoin, Nestade and I are usually DT1.
(edit: I misread that part, mr.relax loses his DT2 position if there are more DT1 exclusions compared to DT1 inclusions)

It's a suitable approach but I don't want to bother Buchi-88 right now, especially because I expect that DT will exclude mr.relax quickly.
I expect at least 4 new DT1 exclusions for mr.relax due to his abuse listed above.
So, let's see next week.  

I got stranded here because apparently Iike to torture my brain and exposing it to severe headache. Long story short and completely unrelated to this topic, I finally tried to tweak the trust list around one week ago, and just a few hours ago, I realized that apparently it leads to me made things a bit too complicated for my brain... and what's displayed on my trust page, but talking about it will be OOT.

On to the topic, your post that I underlined, I don't think it's necessarily true. On one of the thread I read on my attempt to fix what I currently broke --or failed to understand-- I searched throughout the forum for clues --which also how I ended up on this board and nosily read this thread-- and read that,


So, on this relatively new decentralized DT system, mr.relax can be kicked out of DT2 without having Buchi-88 to remove him from his trust list, you just need more DT members exclude him [~mr.relax].

Please tell me I am correct, because this whole trust settings is a new territory for me.

You are right. The user in question isn't a DT member.
If you go to trust page of 1miau and add ;dt to the end of the URL, you will see mr.relax's feedback as untrusted feedback. This means that he is not a DT member.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2143453;dt

https://bpip.org/Profile?id=522205 I don't see mr.relax on dt2 according to bpip. Maybe a couple of you have ~ him already and knocked him off but i'm not really sure because I don't think BPIP updates that quickly.

I had to Google translate that trust feedback and I agree:

Negative tag is not OK to be given for insults.
Negative tag is not OK to be given as a result of disagreements.


Now.. I see some sort of oddity too.
You are trusting Buchi-88 (DT1), he trusts mr.relax (and makes him DT2) and you distrust mr.relax.

I may be wrong, but I think that mr.relax remains DT2 as long as Buchi-88 trusts him and no matter how many direct distrust we give him. <-- I was wrong with this, see the rest of the posts too.
But if my logic is correct, an idea would be that maybe you also discuss with Buchi-88 review his trust list. After all, I see he's a fellow German and may be more aware of the context too.


Of course, the direct distrust on mr.relax most probably also helps on long term.

In our German local section, mr.relax committed already an offence recently: mr.relax luring readers into risky trades (and therefore losing Sats)

After his previous offence, it didn’t take long for him to commit a new one, where he once again made misleading claims about his technical analysis (TA) trading strategy - and then sent me a negative trust after I criticized him...

In addition to his unproven and bold claims, which he made already previously such like, that his technical analysis strategy would be

"4-7 times more profitable than HODL" (archived)
"outstandingly better than HODL" (archived)

he created a new topic called "Trendtrading" (trend trading), where he claimed to "prove" his strategy.
So far, there’s nothing wrong about creating such a topic and documenting his technical analysis strategy. Quite the opposite: I’m in favor of new and interesting topics.
But the problem of mr.relax and his topic: it has been intransparent from the beginning and just to be there to "prove" that his recent bold claims about TA have been right by using misleading strategies.
To "prove" his strategy, mr.relax resorted to a number of clumsy manipulations to make his strategy look better:

• his entry time for his first trade in his topic was misleading: while mr.relax started his topic on February 07, 2023, he dated his trade back to January 14, 2023 – while Bitcoin’s price had already risen massively making his trade look better. And if his trade from January 14, 2023 wouldn’t have worked out, we would have never heard from it. But now, he presented it as "successful". It's always easy to point out, that a trade has been successful after it happened. His fraudulent tactics have been covered in mr.relax luring readers into risky trades (and therefore losing Sats) already.
• After I asked him to post a trading chart to prove that his indicators were indeed showing a change in trend at that time, he refused to do so because he claimed he doesn’t want to reveal his strategy and if he does, it would result in endangering his strategy because "everyone would use it". Sure, if everyone on Bitcointalk had such a power to move markets and decides to use his unproven strategy...  
• He didn't make realistic considerations to add trading fees and taxes into his trades – refusing to include fees and taxes would benefit his trading strategy even more – but to have a realistic review of strategy, he need to include trading fees and taxes – so far, he didn't make proper considerations.
• mr.relax repeated his misleading claims of "4-7x more profitable than HODL" several times.

After I criticized his intransparent approach and misleading claims (because his calculations are massively sugarcoated) and I suggested to be more transparent and less misleading, he childishly demanded from mole0815 to close his topic (because I exposed him) and mr.relax left me a negative trust feedback - LOL.



It’s outright abuse of negative trust from mr.relax.


tl;dr

In our German section, mr.relax abused negative Trust, which he left on my account, just because I criticized his misleading claims and intransparent Technical Analysis (TA trading) strategy topic.
Since mr.relax is DT2 currently (nowadays many clueless and / or fraudulent accounts are in DT2), he should be distrusted for abusing negative trust feedback.


Conclusion:

~mr.relax