Topic: DefaultTrust changes - page 85. (Read 85467 times)

Heh, actually it's funny, I replied so quickly I thought I was replying to Thule...

What I wrote for you is:



So no.  I probably won't be removing that post - as I said a couple of posts (half hour or so) ago.

I haven't given any of Bruno's alts negative trust wall trust as yet.

What I actually said was:


Have you pressured others into removing their DT trust of me?


Thank-you, that's all I ask.

Am I one of the DT Trolls? I think I may have said something unpleasant about your ratings once or twice. I know that when I had you in my list some users lit up red for no good reason. I'll take a look at it again but it's gonna take some time.

Well then you will not get on to DT anytime soon. This is a tight knit crew. You don't red trust Huge Black Woman and get on DT right now.

Don't delude yourself; I won't be removing my Red Paint ^TM, it's an indication of who I trust, or not as the case may be.

Sounds like collusion.... you can come on DT if you change your red tags to suit us. They will throw in some merits too perhaps? Also if they notice you including anyone on your dt list that may not fit in with their agenda then you will be again refused entry so better have a good look over your list. I notice ~myself so that is one good plus for you there.

I would guess for a start you best not have red trust Huge Black Woman aka The Pharmacist. That will not have gone down well. You didn't did you? that would be a mistake if you are looking for DT1 status.

Most people have failed to notice that I have for more than a year taken a mostly hands off approach to my participation in BCT (check the known alts thread if you don't believe me) - any accounts I've given negative trust to in that time I've only done so at the request of the finder of said alts and have given -ve when they themselves have also given red trust.  You would (should) also recall that I've repeatedly stated that a person should give known alts negative themselves instead of calling on others on the DT list to do their work for them.  I even started a poll on the 06 February 2016, 23:40:33 and have given trust wall trust based on the consensus gained in that on going poll.

The DT Trolls ^TM have time and again stated they'd have me on their DT list if I didn't get the odd one or two cases wrong - so I'm still calling all DT Trolls ^TM out - which ones? Where did I get it so wrong?

The DT Trolls' bullying of others to remove me from their DT list is trust abuse.  I call that out.

*edit*

I never -ve tagged suchmoon's account for acquiring bruno



and I don't recall ever slapping any of Bruno's accounts with negative.

I think the idea is that we either use DefaultTrust according to "guidelines" (which are very lax really... not to use it for disagreements and other petty squabbles) or it will be taken away from us. This strategy is often used (and mostly doesn't work) with toddlers but at least some us are supposedly adults so maybe there's hope.

So there's not going to be enforcement that you're expecting. Those users are not in DT anyway.

Seven years eh? http://archive.fo/PJCev#selection-3987.53-3987.77

Archived for future reference: http://archive.fo/prEh6#selection-1905.0-1941.187

---

So theymos...

I take it you're going to sit down and write a letter to all the persons who've given me negative trust (an small example of which is contained in the screen shot below) and demand they remove it to follow your guide-lines?

---

What about the DT Trolls ^TM who've either bullied others to remove their trust of me or given me negative DT trust because they simply didn't agree with my findings on a handful of Known Alts of any-one cases, but neither had the courage nore the ability to voice their concerns in the forum or in a PM?

My 6 posts in that thread that you deleted, H8bussesNbicycles, were relatively innocuous.  They were not signature spamming (I have no signature) and they were not merit whoring because I have plenty of merits and I was just attempting to make experiential observations on the topic, and even largely substantively neutral posts, since I was not trying to get deeply involved into the politics.

I am a bit skeptical about your deletion of my posts, whether that rises to the level of deception on your part or merely a heavy deletion finger remains somewhat unanswered, at least from my perspective.

he differently can't let everything 100% under user control, look at the mess and you will understand, manual intervention is always needed. stingers is clearly merting those guys to get himself a clean profile again, if the other "party" has any similar proof of merit abuse against their "opponents" - they should present it, whining does not get anybody anywhere, proofs usually do.

don't get me wrong i agree with your logic, i personally disagree with the the way that many DT members use the trust system to non-trust related subjects, but this does not mean their rattings that are based on trust are not accurate, if we let a new group take over the trust system overnight then tons of scammers will be set free, these changes have to be done in fair manner, changing for better must be slow,steady and logical, if not ,then we will create a worse mess, i rather see current DT members re-think their negs, focus on trust only subjects, this will solve 90% of the current issues.

Regardless of how justifiable it is, this is not helping your "I wanna do this hands off" argument.

How can you say those merits are simply not deserved? merits are subjective and posts fighting dishonest untrustworthy practises are most deserving. Like people being rewarded for busting scams or other "possible" shady dealings.

I say looking at your bpip and your "friends" bpips these look very "strategic" hence why you are all on in a position to strategically include each other on DT1

There is no rules at all for giving merit is all subjective nonsense. I have proven certain posts are nothing but false assumptions and merely politically motivated faux and empty rebuttals. Yet still they get a ton of merit and the correct and valuable posts get nothing.

This entire merit thing is a sham.

You get into a debate with any of the merit cyclers and regardless of whom is correct or which are the valuable posts they just allocate merit to posts that follow their political views or ideologies. That is why I was trying to define an objective set of criteria that could define a valuable post. Of course none of the merit cyclers wish for that because that stops people like fox pup firing out merit just for any reason. I mean jet cash gave out some the other day because he said he was bored of hearing the same facts being presented against the same person or some rubbish like this.

Merit is the most damaging thing here and now it is tied to DT with this ludicrous 250 earned cycled merit threshold (they all boast about and taunt others saying you will never be able to touch us because we will not allow you to have the merits needed) .. i mean i have asked loyce bring me a some of your great thought inspiring or even very interesting posts (not stats  copy and paste) he brings nothing, I ask tman bring me some of your greatest posts and contribution for debate.... nothing. I mean a handful can present some Okay posts ...nothing of any real importance or that look like a lot of thought went in to them. This main merit circle gang produce nothing but a constant rehash of their own ideologies and parroting support for them for merits. 

Political reasons for meriting are far more common that from analysing the content of the post for the purposes of reaching an optimal solution or outcome.

Now I notice some says okay I agree politically with your views and i will look for a post supporting those views that was well written and expresses clearly the issues with the current status quo and some possible solutions for reaching an optimal outcome in terms of fairness and equality for all and ..............suchmoon starts crying about it and of course those merits need to be removed at once.

Lets start going through all of their posts and see which deserve merits on the basis of the quality and value they provide. You will find significant amounts are awarded during each debate simply for their views aligning with the politics of other cyclers and nothing to do with the logical argument provided and nothing to do with reaching the optimal solution or even reaching the truth.

Let's introduce some criteria for what is a valuable posts and if merit sources are found awarding and cycling merits outside of that then they are removed like stingers. Fox pup awards merit like sweets to his pals for usually nonsense posts or just taking the piss.
How did this person even get so many merits to hand in vast amounts to so many of the same people that all include themselves on dt?

I thought you are against account sales?This account has been clearly being offered for sale and suchmoon is now under control of it.
Do you support account sales in any form that you are not tagging this one ?I thought account sales are being discouraged ?

So how does it come that new accounts which have no negative trust gets instantly a negative feedback when trying to buy an account and a known account doesnt if the overall trust is ok ?

So why did you tagged me ?I have an account which is several years old .Never had a negative feedback only positiv ones.Why did you tagg me negativly ?I mean the overall trust was positiv ?Wasn't it ?


adding me more negative feedback won't change anything.He knows it

counter it with a positive then pussycat

I have been working with Taikuri13 for quite some time. If you look at some of his posts and my posts you will see that he has done translations for me regarding some of the historic topics and scam warnings. He has helped me a lot behind the scenes and is a highly merited user on the Russian forum. I don't see any collusion there.

Um, no.  I don't know any of those members personally.  The judgement comes from their overall trust, i.e., the decentralized trust system.  Gleb has a neg right now, but I disagree with that one and thus haven't tagged him.

Edit:
Sorry, not a fan of giving counter-feedback.

Theymos I agree with your statement and promise that I will not buy any merits to vote against lauda and the cult. Though I have mentioned it I will refrain.
I might state that merits given toward the cause are helpful but I promise I will not buy any merits. I did not solicit Stingers for merits but only after he showed up point him to where merits would help.
I did not know he was a source until suchmoon or someone pointed it out.
It is fine with me that you rescinded those merits.



 
I do not believe that I have used selfmod topics in a deceptive way.
I have only kept their signature spamming and merit whoring out of my thread and kept it to the topic.
Many of their quotes are still there for all to read whoever responded to them. If I was trying to hide their statements I would have deleted them too.

So to receive the right to buy an alt without getting a negative feedback is that you need to know that user.
Seems very centralised to me.How many of all users do you know on that forum to make a proper judgement ?


Yes. You are a person, not a community.
[/quote][/quote]
Actually i'm part of the community and represent a group with diffrent opinions



@theymos


If you get active on stinger how does it come you didn't get activ on these merit abusers ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/atriz-and-lauda-just-got-merit-2829282


You call that quality which deserved 50 merits ?
From atriz (alt of Lauda) to Lauda himself ?

I really see you trying to change that forum into a decentralised place run by the community.However acting on DT's member request (like stinger) but being at the same time blind of merit abuse from Lauda and other DT members instantly puts an imbalance between community power and current DT members who have circled merits for a longer time which is a known fact.


I mean show me any quality threads of TMAN or Vod as example ?
How did they mainly get their merits ?
Surely not for posting quality posts but people supporting their actions like tagging someone.Calling someone out etc.
So if they got their main merit from supporters of actions why do you put the community in a disadvantage that we are not allowed to merit peoples action we support ?


Many DT members have majority of their merit from people supporting their actions instead of post quality.Didn't see any actions on that?
Maybe someone can show me the quality posts where Lauda earned his merits.