Topic: [Cult of Lauda] An historic peace: Rome’s treaty with Carthage (Read 2115 times)

The trust system is broken because Theymos refuses to restrict the trust system to purely objective uses and ignores the human element.  He had an opportunity to change that with the introduction of the flag system, but he wasted that perpetuating the same flaws that caused its failure to begin with. I warned that the ability to use the system for ambiguous reasons would result in its failure, but he persisted. Unfortunately this thing is such a mess now I am not sure it can be salvaged.

I agree with the view on Libertarianism, but fail to understand how a pure democracy wud leave theymos as the only DT1 member?
Also the current DT1 is representative democracy and if you take into account the laddered DT2 and DT3; then IMHO it looks like a Preferential Voting Democracy.

Although, it is True that the Trust system doesn't prevent anyone from researching for themselves; but it cannot be denied it does provide a semblance of security for dealers on the forum, especially noobs. Thus, to relegate it to a position of utmost irrelevance would be quite a misnomer IMHO. The Trust system is broken and beyond repair as long as we are unable to deny the human element in its assertion (which can't be denied). So, at the end of the day it is To Each His Own.

Nah, you really don't. How cute, you can be senseless and refractory. Yes, it has. There is no evidence to support the claims made against me the negative ratings are based on, and the ones who left them refuse to substantiate them. Maybe Google due process, I am not your 5th grade Social Studies teacher. You defending me? Cool story bro. Too bad you still enable this abuse by including those individuals. Kind of like talking about how you need to go on a diet as you continue eating a tub of ice cream from the carton.

Yes, I do.



Is that an accusation you've yet to substantiate?



Has your "right to due process" been stripped from you?  Have you been unable to plead your case?  Have others not come to your defense (including myself?)  Accusers be accusing, you be defending, haters be hating.  Where does "due process" even come into play here?

No, he doesn't. He is operating off of the stereotype that libertarianism is like anarchy, it is nothing of the sort. Libertarians still support a system of rights, law, and justice, they just think it should be absolutely minimal as possible.


I am afraid you have fooled yourself in order to relieve the cognitive dissonance resulting from your hypocrisy. If this was a democratic republic I would have the right to due process and my accusers would have to substantiate their accusations rather than just make a bunch of them until they can find a story plausible enough to stick for the mob to grab a hold of and run with. You will never get it. The only reason you think everything is fine is because you haven't yet been the target of it. Of course there is also the little matter of the fact that I have 8 years of effort invested into my reputation here, and you just showed up, what a year ago? Easy to be casual with a tiny fraction of the time and effort at stake. When it is you I am sure all of a sudden it will be a travesty. Also the fact that I agitate you doesn't make my argument invalid.

P.S. You better find those principles soon before Nutilduhhh gives your poor goat a prolapse.

Agreed, but one individual going at it alone doesn't change the fact that the system works because of the votes of those who participate.  Like a democratic republic, those who don't participate must live with the consequences of their inaction.



I'm afraid you will never get it.  The trust system isn't about you, and your precious rating's visibility.  And, I did in fact pay attention to my civics classes.  Just because this democratic republic has rejected you as one of it's representatives doesn't make any less of one.

DWM14 does have a bit of a point here but I would say more like "the complete lack of a DT system"..
The space to leave notes is not the thing, but rather it is the weight the notes carry if made by certain individuals, and how they got that weight, IMO..

I do like the DT system a lot, but it got quite an unfair start between the initial start of the merit system, concentration of merits to a certain area/board/group, to the initial start of the new DT system, with a group of those protesting the old DT system by creating their own custom trust lists before it was even implemented, having quite a head start..

I still respect theymos a lot, and I think he is trying hard not to put himself in the place of a king here by keeping his hands off of the trust system, and letting it go where it goes, even if he doesn't always agree with its direction..

Though this removing Lauda from his exclusions list move has me really questioning the direction that I see he may hope it will go in..
Quite a wrench thrown into the matrix of what I thought was going on around here, so I have to think again about some things..

Except if you want to build a reputation for trade under this system, then you are directly penalized for not participating in it by having positive trust ratings left for you being less visible.

The trust system doesn't prevent anyone from fending for themselves and doing their own research. DT is optional. Trust lists are optional. If someone wants to go full Amish they can just wipe their trust list and have at it.


It doesn't matter what excuse you have for it. That red trust is bullshit regardless of who it is against. Your support of such bullshit ratings makes your whole posturing about "standards" worthless.

Yep, I am a big old meanie for holding people to the same obsessive and meddling standards they hold others to. Especially when it is one of your pals.



You clearly slept through your social studies classes in middle school.

You're both wrong.  Libertarianism would be the complete lack of a trust system, everyone fending for themselves and doing their own research, caveat emptor.  A pure democracy would leave theymos as the only DT1 member.  We have 100 representatives (DT1) all with differing number of votes, from a wide variety of voters.  It's much closer to a representative democratic republic than either of you are crediting.

 

Big words. Sadly it's mostly a projection. I'm rooting for you though, maybe one day you'll start practicing what you preach.

Yep. The original culture of the forum has been ruined and invaded by trifling statist totalitarian "Karens" who want to talk to your manager and replicate all the horrible systems Bitcoin was designed to escape from. I originally came here to trade because it was a good alternative to places like Fleabay, there wasn't some one crawling up my ass with all kinds of restrictions and I could be left to myself to deal with customers as I chose.

All I ever wanted to do was be left alone to enjoy the forum within my rights to use it as anyone else has. I was dragged into all of this forum politics bullshit against my will, and now I am sure a lot of the people doing the dragging wished they would have just left me to my business, because now I spend my time stapling a list of their double standards to their faces. I guess that is what happens when you remove all incentives from people to work within the established system. Unfortunately the people perpetrating this abuse, or willfully ignoring it, don't seem to get the connection.

Either everyone is free or no one is free. You can avert your eyes now, but eventually it is going to be your turn to be the target of the mob. That is the nature of it, that is unless we collectively stand up to it. Instead we get people here and there resisting, and they are allowed to be picked off one by one while the rest of the jellyfish cower, try to avoid conflict at all cost, and try to pretend that they are "one of the boys", and it will never happen to them.

This forum has devolved from its origination by cypherpunk anarchists building a tool of liberty toward NPC normies who would rather appeal to authority, and power seekers over an economy of profit seekers..


"I can neither confirm nor deny"
A pretty good line that got me some great pussy one time when I was asked how I know so much about MCs..
Many of my principles of respect and couth came from the MC culture..

Good luck trying to paint me as dishonest..

Poor Nullius a huge wall of trying to sound smart boils down to.

2 people certain for years that each other are dangerous scammers suddenly and together mutually removing what they have claimed are essential warnings = stopping fighting

lol that sounds in the best interests of the forum.

Can someone graft a brain to what appears to be a heap of random knowledge of perhaps one of those talking encyclopedias? all self taught memorized data with no clue how to apply it.

Please wind bag,  just go back into retirement.

Then again, why deprive myself of this guilty pleasure? Pump out some more pretentious cannon fodder please.
Scammer toadies can qualify for full scammer thrashings I think.

 

On Cause and Effect

I find it remarkable that the trolls are fixated on the removal or downgrading of tags, which is an effect—rather than the apology, change of behaviour, and mutual agreement to stop fighting, which are the cause.

Remarkable, as in literally, “should be remarked upon”—not unexpected, unusual, or surprising, per the usual connotation.

---

Quote from: eddie13 on February 15, 2020, 05:02:50 PM

Quote from: nullius on February 15, 2020, 04:49:47 PM

Extreme out-of-context cherry-picking to turn an obviously sarcastic remark into a serious admission.

Thanks.  It is overt evidence of the same honesty that you usually manifest more covertly.

Yeah, I totally said "Look everyone! nullius admitted to secret underground meetings!".. Nope..
Do you not expect readers to have the capacity to see context?

Well, there is your usual “honesty”—i.e., talking from both sides of your mouth.

A reading of your post according to the “ordinary reasonable person” standard makes my point for me, insofar as any ordinary reasonable person can see that you stripped the clause which made it crystal-clear that I was simply ridiculing the notion.  An ELI5 is not required; but for the lulz, let us see how different your post looks when the clause you omitted is restored:

Quote from: eddie13 on February 15, 2020, 03:42:45 PM

Quote from: nullius on February 15, 2020, 10:53:54 AM

secret underground meeting where we get our orders from an evil cat stroking a pet human

That would explain a lot..
Looks like some deals are going on here, but nobody cares about TECSHARE..

LOL, yes:  “That would explain a lot.”  So would actual witchcraft!  And I am sorry, Mr Quickseller, if you did not realize that simply making peace with Lauda requires that you shall be abducted by space aliens for the implantation of Lauda-alt mind-control devices in your brain.  Well, it is now part of the deal.  The flying saucer will be at your house any moment, for your psychotronic “onboarding” before you are used for breeding experiments.  Anybody who denies this is only a brain-chipped catbot covering up THE TRUTH about you and Lauda, as you will soon see PROVED in a thousand troll posts against you.

Quote from: nullius on February 11, 2020, 06:55:43 AM

Alas, Quickseller, no good deed goes unpunished.

---

Quote from: eddie13 on February 15, 2020, 05:02:50 PM

Do you know anything about any deals made? Eh?
You seem a bit overly defensive on that subject now..\

I am not taking the bait, which is almost comically foolish insofar as anybody can see that I am mostly ignoring the cacophony of accusations from the trolls here.  “Defencive”?  Not quite—oh, wait:  Will you next claim that because I refused to be defencive, I must be hiding something?  I did not deny the existence of secret underground meetings with secret deals!

I was interested in the overt evidence of your usual dishonesty, as I said.  Your custom is to be more slippery, as you are here.

So having said, I will not argue the point.  Complaints 2>/dev/null (Thanks, Anonymous, for the upgraded shell script!)

Great, you can keep praying and enjoying the last few moments of anyone caring to read your walls of text. Yes, go ahead and create a separate thread, enough derailing this one.

That is not true. The first part is irrelevant bordering raw ad hominem. There is no need for any single member to take responsibility for community determined  transparent objective standards which are applied equally to all members.

No, they can be objective standards that are scrutinized and debated by the entire community. Reason would dictate no single member.

Should I open a suitable thread where you can debate retaining the tagging system over a move to a transparent objective set of standards under the flagging system?

" I'm sorry" was sarcastic, please attempt to control this cathartic indulgence. We can discuss things cordially and in a sensible adult manner. You are not a scammer, there is no reason for us to be unpleasant to one another. Remain calm and rely upon your critcal reasoning to defeat my proposal.

I take it you also reject this red trust bartering is quite worrying and the prime driver was not the safety of the wider community?

Just before we move to our own thread?
I like you suchmoon. You have some principles. I want to investigate them thoroughly before adding you to my future trust inclusions list. I accept that you are not a scammer but is it more important for you to be seen as clever and funny than do what is best for this whole community. Ego is a prime concern. You and TS are like twin brothers actually, the more I observe you both. I hope that both sides realize that is quite a compliment.

You have a little more abrasive or as ch said 'caustic' style suchmoon. He was such an insightful member. I miss his posts dearly. I pray he returns daily.

Oh, I'm sorry. Your message is shit because you're not only refusing to take personal responsibility but also trying to impose your "standards" on others.

That sadly would not prove that I am not also cryptohunter. Which I may very well be. Who can say. At this time I will politely decline your offer.

Again though Eddie the messenger is really irrelevant. The message is always that which requires scrutiny.

I like you Eddie. A fair and reasonable member. A strong admin prospect.

Directed to suchmoon:  it is actually a libertarian nightmare. You give a handful of members the tools (merit source) to control everones fate. I know that you are smart enough to understand this. Actually, if it had been announced from the outset that earned merit score would mean  that you can set the rules, and deprive people of their warning potential; there would have been a lot more competition.

Imagine telling the public your votes no longer register, only the political ruling party members votes count now.

The system look like it was deliberately designed to gradually erode free speech.  Along with that permit a handful at the top to scam with impunity. Those asking questions are discredited with a scam tag and warning on the top of their threads to disbelieve what you read.

Worrying.

I see theymos has now demonstrated he had no real desire to see lauda removed from DT even though a blatant red trust bartering is taking place in clear view.
He just removed his exclusion.

I would speculate things will only roll downhill from here with regard free speech and transparent objective standards.

When the forum 'warden' (perfect toaa / ch / x) is advocating a member with 9 years of immaculate trading history being branded a scammer by a proven scammer. Then you have a real problem to contend with.

This red trust removal bartering is blatant.  it could only take place with theymos approval. We've known this since OG was tilted towards removing Laura's red tags.

Of course you can spin up 100 alts and say what you like but you will not earn a satoshi. That rules out 99.99% of members reason to be here.

Theymos will never explain his actions, so safest to presume the worst credible intent.  Disappointing, since he is good at presenting admirable goals.

This forum is loaded up with socks. Who knows who is really doing what. I suspect every member that resists objective transparent standards,  Including admin. Why else resist the removal of that which affords huge advantage to a tiny percentage of members.

There is always the possibility theymos is playing a game above which is observable. That hope dwindles away with each move he makes recently. I hope that i am wrong.

I will never believe certain members are not dangerous to this forum. This recent trading of tag removals only supports this.