Topic: Can a default trust member (Lauda) arbitrary destroy other people's reputation?? - page 2. (Read 5897 times)

 All disputes arose out of fear for (90%) is premined at genesis block, at the moment the proposal is sounded,
"I am not Escsow!! just submitted the idea to the project was spot on. I can advise developers to contact respected bitcointalk SebastianJu !! https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/sebastianju-18640 !! "
  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.20704474
If the developer resolves, questions will disappear by themselves.

Yeah well you're 'captain nonsense', if I may be so bold. 
Fact is, most coins are scams and there appears to be some credible
evidence that this one is...so if anyone (that includes DT peeps) doesn't
trust the developers or the people trying to pump it into the stratosphere,
they are justified in leaving a red trust.  That's how the trust system works.
If you don't like it, that's cool but there isn't much you can do except complain.
This has been discussed to death already.  Not gonna change.

What was that word you made up in that other thread?  Something to do with
sex?  I had a little lol over that.

Can a default trust member (Lauda) destroy other people's reputation??
 "Well what smells".
Captain obvious.

I don't think that I have ever seen a larger collection of shills in one thread. This has to be a new feat.

There's nothing to discuss as you don't have a valid case and you're heavily biased towards the developer and the shitcoin.

Another false and defamatory claim. My rating (not that it is necessary) has been *re-enforced* by at least two other DT members. Please indulge me by explaining why I am wrong, again.

I gave up the discussion here, as it is not really a discussion. Lauda basically said he/she wants to do whatever he wants, no rule, no reason, just what he wants. It's fine. It seems is the way of the trust system in this forum, so be it. Sigh.

Maybe 20% for marketing promotion is too much, but it depends on how deep onion dev do it.

And according to your theory, byteball 1% for dev is greedy too, Signatum 0% premined.

We can't really comment a coin on how much dev wanted to have.

Forget the fud and nonsense that comes with this place. We trust you and support you. I mean what's the worst that can happen He runs ! This is what comes from troll land.

What does "well what smells" mean
No shit it is not a word, it is a sentence captain obvious 
I do not however understand, what kind of problem you have with Lauda?
Lauda might be maybe too strict on some occasions, however he/she is always reasonable about their decisions and such.
That is why Lauda is a DT member because of the responsibility and strictnesss (as well as always being fair and not bringing personal problems into business).

You understand well what smells is not a word.

You claimed that I was the developer of some other coin, which I am not -> you lied (for whatever reason). I am a member of plenty of teams/groups, which has no relevance to this shitcoin nor its developer.

That's not even a word.

Stop trust farming, being greedy and get some education.

I'm not a friend but quite sympathetic. Your question is interesting and can cause support in the original topic. If you come there without attacks like a dogemajestic. IMHO.
So you blame the lie and are a member of another team.
Unexualness is the smallest expression that can be applied.
Die down on your ego.

Is there a bounty payments reports in Deep Onion thread? I'd like to see a link. Bounty budget is huge and he can send big payment for the easy tasks to his friends. I think community should see all details of bounty payouts.

In what dimension does being a signature campaign manager mean being a developer? The only attack here is the one by the developer and his army of shills.

Can you explain how it fits in the light of a personal attack.

It is not. This thread was made by a shill, complaining about things that he doesn't even understand. The trust ratings are backed up by reference ratings and each of the three is perfectly valid.

Do I look like a time traveler? It doesn't seem like you've spent more than 2 minutes looking over the situation, and just came to complain.

No, it's quite obvious that you don't even have the elementary understanding of the system in place. This is just more evidence that this thread is full of shills.

No, that's not a honest mistake especially not after it was followed by a fake retaliatory rating¹ which was full of baseless accusations. Contacted a mod? Moderators have nothing to do with ratings, which are not moderated.

Shills complaining about their shady overlord getting what he/she/it deserves*.

---

1 - Part of what he wrote on my wall: "because s/he did many mis-deeds in the past to the people and like stealing their money and reputation.". He claims that I have stolen money. Is this a honest mistake too?

20+10% part is very very questionable. If you check many other projects you will agree with me.

1) I dont know what you're reading but this thread is litterally about those trust ratings and their implications. The fact IMO they cannot be trusted invalidates them in my eyes. I.e. I used to see the red numbers next to a persons profile and steer clear now I will just ignore them because I know they cant be trusted.

2) Why not just leave one negative trust rating if you feel so strongly that this is a scam, spamming the trust rating seems like an attack to me and further feeds into why I would no longer trust the trust system here, to me this seems like an abuse of the system. If it were just the one, even though I wouldnt necessarily agree with it, I wouldn't have bothered posting here.

3) Even though I dont know how the default trust network works I know how the trust system in general works and IMO if the people at the "top" of the trust system cant be trusted in my view the whole system cant be trusted.

IMO both sides have some questionable things, crypto-rainbow using the context of an airdrop for a campain and yourself for attacking him with the trust system, there is the miss step of him asking for positive feedback but I see that as an honest mistake trying to ask for help with a broken system when he should have posted here or contacted a mod. It all just seems like something that could have been resolved with an open discourse before jumping stright in with scam accusations and neagtive trust ratings.

At the end of the day this is just my opinion and I cant do anything more than express it in the hopes it will improve things in the future as a trust system that isnt abused could be a great feature but as it stands I feel it can do just as much harm as good.

I hate to say it but to me it seems like children playing games instead of adults trying to build a safe community.

1) This thread has nothing to do with the trust ratings that I've left on the user nor could any of my posts *invalidate* those ratings.
2) There is no attack. For it to be an attack, the coin/developer would have to be important enough for someone to have an reason to attack them. This shitcoin is worth zero, and I would not have acted differently towards any developer of any other coin (provided that the course of actions was exactly the same).
3) You don't know how the trust network works, yet you make claims on what should or should not be? Definitely smart.

Campaign != airdrop.

Relevance?

There is only 1 reasonable course of action: The developer needs to get more negative ratings, from more DT members.

This is the only reasonable explanation