Topic: DefaultTrust changes - page 99. (Read 85916 times)

Yet not one person involved was upset at me.  Strange how that works.  I guess you know more reading archives 7 years later than all the individuals who were involved.  Really disgusting how your little crew attacks me for making legitimate points.  I will endure the bullying with the hope it inspires change.


I don't believe trust ratings like the below that use a slur like "faggot" have any place in the DT network.  Convince me I'm wrong.

I noticed OGNasty edited post with this line:


http://web.archive.org/web/20140429234623/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.0
http://web.archive.org/web/20140429234523/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.20
http://web.archive.org/web/20140429234619/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.40
http://web.archive.org/web/20140429234549/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=75843.60

Now, imagine I am someone who discovered bitcoin in 2011. and point me lies.

post number #23  

I've seen enough of your "personality" in the off-forum chatrooms, PMs, and other places where you think nobody is watching. You're not a genuinely honest person by a long shot. Genuinely honest people don't do go around threatening others like that. Also - genuinely honest people typically don't feel that much need to espouse their own good deeds. Usually those speak for themselves.

It's funny that you think my personality equates to "fake public displays of righteousness" instead of me just being a genuinely honest person who wants to see other honest people do well.  Given all the good I've worked almost daily to do here for nearly a decade now, if you still hold that opinion it says more about you than me.

I don't believe trust ratings like the below that use a slur like "faggot" have any place in the DT network.  Convince me I'm wrong.

I find the longevity dynamic in bitcoin to be interesting, as well.  Even though I recognize some utility in non-bitcoin projects, frequently I am skeptical about why, frequently, they need their own tokens and cannot merely just build upon bitcoin rather than fragmenting into some separate money printing project.

There seems to be an ongoing mixed bag of outcomes regarding longevity of members, and of course, the very oldest of forum members would have only been involved in bitcoin because bitcoin was largely the ONLY game in town, yet merely being an "oldtimer" does not seem to immune folks from ending up on the scamming side of the ledger, whether there was a long con involved or if merely the short-term opportunity to scam presents itself.

Surely, longevity can allow opportunities to build credibility, yet for scammers to be shown by their behaviors in certain opportunistic situations, regarding which shit projects they end up pumping and whether or not they know those projects to be shit.

No, I'm not threatened by your high horseshit, nor am I impressed by your victim card. As I said, I trust owl's direct if somewhat NSFW prose much more than your fake public displays of righteousness. I wouldn't be surprised if you're actually sufficiently deluded to believe that "many users" prefer your "standards" and "professionalism" of using DT to adjudicate your personal quarrels. To each their own.

And my post above yours, where I mentioned that you invested investments in obvious ponzi is also valid post.

You don't even know what you're talking about...  Spreading lies that you weren't involved with, before you discovered Bitcoin, is the only way I'm aware of you.  I insured against deposits and then paid out what I insured them for in the face of everyone else walking away from their commitments.  That is good behavior.  You not being able to judge the difference is only evidence you don't belong in a position to judge trust.  My post quoted below is a valid one about professionalism as it pertains to the subject at hand and shouldn't be buried with off topic nonsense.  

Interesting choice of words.

Investing investment in obvious ponzi. That is what you did. You don't have problem with that but you seems have problem when people say that out loud.

pirateat40 offered 7% weekly, or, 30% monthly, rumor says you arranged higher returns:
Yep, you got me.

---

Oh, OGNasty is allowed to point out "bad behavior" but others are not.

I point out bad behavior and then the crew comes out to get me.  Typical...  Always trying to bury legitimate concerns as quickly as possible...  It would take a lot more than just me being included in the DT network to bring the DT ratings up to my standards of accurate.  That's why custom trust networks are encouraged in the first place.  You shouldn't be threatened by me wanting a certain level of professionalism in Bitcointalk's default trust network.  I imagine many users want that.

As opposed to sleazy backroom threats that you prefer? I'll take owl's foul language any day.

You, St. Nasty, are in no position to judge. Lovely contradiction though. Community draws the line but the current line is not accurate... I bet it would become accurate as soon as you find yourself in DT again.

Where that line is drawn is up to the community, and I like that.  I can accept currently the view is that unprofessionally battering users with harsh language is acceptable among those we wish to be pillars of the community.  I'm not sure that the majority is currently represented accurately and change is made by voicing opinions.  I'd like to believe a majority of this forum would think the below quoted feedback should be considered unacceptable standards for the DT network.  The below was left because I asked another user a question and gave examples of why I asked the question.


You want to blame me for pirateat40?  Get real.  This is the sort of ignorant nonsense that amazes me and why intelligent members who have been around for a long time are valuable, while members who came years later showing themselves as susceptible to believing wrong information getting into positions of trust is dangerous.  I'm the only person who insured against pirateat40's exit and paid out everyone.  No other person involved lived up to their promises and that was what, like 4 years before you discovered Bitcoin?

Oh, please! Don't make me start...

Calling it chaos is a bit out of touch. If the DT member fills this criteria :


Then it's safe to say that the included users at least have some basic understanding of the forum rules, etiquette, and the fact that they are trusted by a handful of others means they at least managed to convince a small group to include them.

Let's say that this list includes 50 users, the fact that they fill the criteria means they won't think in the detriment of the forums to purposely create chaos, simply for their own sake. They ARE trusted members after all.

So in the end, disagreements will only come out of conflicting subjective opinions on other users. Is it chaos? No. It's decentralization. If half the default trust or more agrees that X is good or bad, and IF all their opinions are their own, then the trust system is working great, and that user is objectively judged by the network.

Any attempt at monitoring, investigating, modifying, or judging a DT member's choices by other members, creates room for manipulation. It's not an attempt at organizing it, it's an attempt at centralizing it.

I am not sure if I understand the 4chan reference, at all.

Is there some kind of implication that 4chan is an out of control (or wild and unwieldy) place in part due to its size?  And therefore the changes to this forum's trust system has moved this forum in that chaotic and wild direction?

At this point, I see the changes in DT to be causing: 1) more input from regular members regarding which members might get on DT1 (specifically through the weighted merit voting), which thereafter affects DT2 and subsequent DT layers and 2) a likely expansion to the number of members who are on DT1 (and by implication increasing the number of members on DT2 and subsequent DT layers - moving more members up to higher levels of DT).

So, in that regard, if I am correct in my above guess about what OgNasty and you mean to imply by the 4chan comment, then there could be some truth to your statement that this forum is moving more in a direction of a more dispersed power structure, yet there seems to be some attempts at systemizing this place in a kind of way that attempts to organize the chaos and therefore the changes to DT may not go so far as having the level of chaos that is implied by OgNasty's above quoted (and seemingly exaggerated) attempted comparison about the current situation.

By the way, to me, it seems that sometimes strong comments and perhaps harsh language might be needed and useful in order to clearly and unambiguously make certain points.

BTW, what is 4chan? I only know reddit.

I prefer to describe this forum as 4chan with an extensive research library.

I am referring to the FACT that I have PROOF lauda is a liar. I have PROOF that  lauda left me red trust (after calling me a liar 3x and could never produce any evidence)  after I said that  if he called me a liar again without evidence I would encourage people to review his post history where I can PROVE that he was a LIAR.

That is called evidence and proof.  Do you wish me to present it again.

I have PROOF tman himself admitted giving me red trust for presenting those FACTS.

You owlcatz the 3rd member of the extortion undercover agents scheme lol  gave me red trust for that same facts based post.

Now please stop trying to say that I am insane because I can present facts that you DT members do not want known.

It is simply called presenting the TRUTH.

Now stop diverting and trying to hide the FACTS by calling me crazy. Sorry but it does not change the FACT that those are observable events that took place.

I do not trust any of you and I will not accept red trust for presenting facts regarding your prior wrong doing.  That is total and utter abuse of what DT was intended for.

Your new DT1 member folks!  This site is slowly turning into a home for 4chan rejects.

You are fucking delusional. You earned those ratings you wackjob fuck.

Also, you have nothing, no proof of shit - because nothing ever happened, you fool.


What? Wrong thread, knucklehead....