Topic: Douglus should remove cryptodevil from DT due to conflict of interest - page 4. (Read 9065 times)

The problem with this discussion is I am going off what Cryptodevil has stated in other threads that he would do to help clean that section up. Now that I have bitten into the issue he has deleted or retracted some of the comments,which leaves me looking like I was just pissing in the wind for the fun of it. Was also his thinking that by posting in the thread you where guilty of supporting a ponzi and that was initially his intent. Sure he will come in here and claim different and it becomes a he said/she said,so I am bowing out of this discussion.
I make a lot of my posts from my cell and to link,copy and paste is just a bitch on this stupid phone. Its just not worth the energy,you either get labeled a sock or a idiot and if thats how we proceed...so be it.

End of the day its hard to take Cryptodevil seriously and thats why I question why he trolls and the other half of him wades into the scammer busting. Seems to be a odd mix but has the blessings of the forum and thats that.

Once you get rid of a issue I hope you rid yourself of all the scammers you see but leave a subsection for people that want to be left alone,would yeah!

This got me curious enough to go looking for it

Sure enough Zeke is bending the truth a bit:


So not quite "anyone posting in it(Anyone!)".

Here is an example of a red tag although I can't be 100% sure if that's what Zeke had in mind:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14151706

I haven't seen the post. Can you link me to it and any neg rep left as a result?


If I had known it was QS I would have simply ignored the message. The guy seems to enjoy trolling me and so I try to ignore him. The PM says that if I don't do what he wants he will try to get me removed from default trust. Isn't that a threat? If you threaten me via PM then I will post your threat in public so show others how you behave in private.


If it's QS then it is about me. He has been using whatever he can find to dig at me for months if not years now.

Except that your whole sad story is exaggerated. Not "everyone" gets labeled and there is an easy way to "unlabel".


Exactly my point. The issue is not that someone labels scam supporters. The issue is that some people (a) don't consider that important and (b) would rather impose their own rules up to and including pressure on DT1 members instead of learning how to use the system that's already in place. Granted the system is not perfect but we can't even begin to discuss that if the expectation is to have it all work magically to everyone's satisfaction.

Read the post again, I wasn't talking about you being an alt of anyone

My post was about ponzis' threads posters given neg trust: no other hidden purposes here.


That's why I feel the big size red text cryptodevil is copypasting in each ponzi thread, in addition to being an excellent job, could be enough.



Well , than I'm a noob because I never bothered checking how trust system works here (maybe because I don't sell/trade etc etc) and my trust settings are the same one I had the day I created my account.
So it happens that I now see more red trust around than the ones I used to see when I was a lower rank member and consequently, unconsciously, I pay less attention to those red numbers than I did before.
tl'dr : I'm afraid it can generate the effect of diminishing the importance of the trust rating
But it's probably just my problem.

Yeah that fact seems to be ignored in this, hmm, can't really call it a discussion because only one side is presenting reasoned argument, so let's just stick with butt-hurt-circle-jerk,  yes, that's probably the most fitting description for what this band of socks is actually doing here.

I've easily deleted as many negative ratings as remain currently, with numerous PMs from people who genuinely didn't understand what the fact of the 'scheme' they were getting involved in was. So, in that a simple removal of the 'supporting' post will generally result in a user's trust being restored to its former state, I fail to see what the muppets and puppets are actually bitching about other than their own desire to behave dishonestly without being held to account.

I look forward to receiving evidence of my 'out of control' abuse of the trust system, though, replete with multiple references to slippery-slopes and Nazis. Lol. Still chuckling at the pathetic use of, "When they came for..."

Removing your posts in the ponzi threads mostly solves those "issues".

Wtf else could it be about!
You gloss over the fact new accounts will wander through the forum and post. They now will see whats going on in that subforum and wonder where else they are not allowed to post. Think some of you have not been a noob in awhile, reason yoy gloss over negative trust killing any chance of being in a signature campaign. It also restricts trade with others. It takes time for negative trust accounts to establish. End of the day you label everyone and it means less.
Whining and crying just shows how you and others of the same thinking still do not see the problem.
Have given this enough attention, if people want to talk contact me through pm. Its pointless breathing life into this issue now.

Forum allows outright scams too, i.e. there is no moderation on scams as clearly stated in the text you quoted. That's what the trust system is for. Negative trust is not a ban or any other kind of disciplinary action depriving the target of some God-given or constitutional right. It's a warning. Everyone is free to set their trust settings up in such a way that they only see "red" for the warnings that they want to see. Default Trust is just a recommendation for noobs.

All these whiners in this and dozens of other "cryptodevil is evil" threads should consider spending that time educating noobs on how to make use of trust settings. Win-win for everyone. But we know this isn't about cryptodevil or ponzis, is it?

QFR
================================

@dooglus

The discussion is based around what Cryptodevil says he is doing and what he plans to. Lets ignore I told QS to use his main account, but I guess I could be some one elses sock, just dislike being written off in that way.
Back to the issue...Cryptodevil enters this subforum in question and leaves a copy and paste big red threat post, stating anyone posting in it(Anyone!) will get neg rep. Have reported these as spam/threats and suggest others do the same.
Back in this thread he trolls people which reflects what he is doing with the ne rep.
If you consider QS private message a threat, than there is no doubt you agree Crypto is crossing the line. (Is it ok to post private messages?).

This to me is not about you, but a attempt to get cryptodevil to reflect on what he is potentially doing to the trust.

@Mexxer-2
Come on dude...this is getting old. You come at me and say what you got to say, no need to skirt around issues. If this stems from my last post about you, luptin an wwf, it was a joke example. Lets drop this sock talk or prove it once and for all.

lol If your guess is right then cryptodevil is in big troubles  

Height:    6 ft 5 in (1.96 m)
Weight:    245 lb (111 kg)

 




BTW, for what it counts I find excessive the red trust for anyone joining or posting in favour of a Ponzi.
A red trust for the promoter and that big size red text cryptodevil is already copy/pasting in any ponzi thread are enough for me; also considering there is already this forum disclaimer

"Warning: You are in the Gambling section. You are likely to eventually lose any money that you gamble/"invest". Additionally, moderators do not remove likely scams. You must use your own brain: caveat emptor. Do not gamble more than you can afford to lose."

and that this forum allows that kind of threads.

It's also the first name of a Panthers (huh? ) Quaterback named Newton, carrying the number 1 -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cam_Newton

Erm, isn't "Cam" guitarplinker's "signature"
In summary, the only users who are complaining not because they themselves got tagged for promoting the ponzis are
1)Mist: Random somebody who recently started meta/reputation discussion
2)Your Point Is Invalid: The guy who has been after removing any DT member who tags based on suspicion and near conclusive proof aka "The guy who complains about me being in DT while having me manually added to his trust list"
3) newtons1: Pretty clear who he is
4) Zeke: Same as the first guy with some traits of the second
Edit:

5) Gimpeline: Someone who clearly doesn't have an idea of whats going on, and has suddenly appeared back from the dead
6) Dorrittulx: Is clearly trolling
7) The Pharmacist: No arguments, only opinions
Everybody, did I miss anyone?

I just received the following threat in a private message:



I hadn't seen this thread before, and have only read the first 3 posts.

The premise that there is a conflict of interest because if people don't give their money to scammers then they might be more inclined to give it to me is just crazy, and applies just as well to *any other business*.

Does a purveyor of alpaca socks benefit by attempting to warn people about scams, because any money not lost to scams could instead by spent on socks?


My stance on Ponzis is that they're fine if they're honest. Very few are honest and promise unrealistic guaranteed payouts. If they're upfront about the risk "players" are taking then I don't see a problem with them, but very few do that. As I understand it, cryptodevil sees things the same way. If you don't want him leaving you negative feedback, stop making posts supporting obvious scams. Seems pretty simple to me.

Edit: having now read this thread it seems quite a few people (or quite a few sockpuppets) think cryptodevil is "out of control".

If anyone has any concrete examples of him leaving unreasonable trust feedback please PM me to let me know and I'll look into it. I don't think it's unreasonable to negative-rate people who are supporting obvious scams by making positive posts about them.

Dude, really... HOW ABOUT READING??



He wrote a text for me... lol

@cryptodevil: nanananananana :p


EDIT: i just decided i will leave you alone with the whining threads.

He was talking to him till he used "all others",insinuating that every one that had a issue was of this nature.
I take it easy on the sock and alt references but if we are going to paint a wagon make sure you are attacking the right people.

Sorry for hijack,just did not like letting this slip when I was accused of this last week by the hateful whatever you want to call it now.
Fair play or should I have turned the other cheek.


 

Lets see: using the same arguments against dooglus, constant near to neutral arguments about tagging of ponzis , all of which matches with a user who usually likes to talk from alts even though there is no reason to. Was that even a question?

But I'd rather not discredit the OP, as he can be quite an awesome guy at times

That reminded me, a user I'd like not to disclose was talking about connecting me with kingaltcoins, Lutpin and Joel. I'd love to post the hilarious arguments presented by them but nah, lets keep it for another day

Same can go for you. He was addressing newtons1 here.

Big thanks to everyone creating all these cryptodevil/mexxer/lutpin/ecuamobi appreciation threads. This is now my favorite lunchtime entertainment. So much butthurt - these guys/gals must be doing something right.

Yeah, whywefight, get your own thread of whining shitbags who can't string together a coherent rebuttal and hate being held to account for their actions.

This one is mine, all mine!!!11!!11elebenty!!1!

Soon I will triumph over Vod as the antagonist with the biggest hateclub! Mwahaaahaaahaaaaa. Etc. (disclaimer: number of real people may not equal that of the multiple forum accounts dedicated to showering you with constant attention, your dreams may not equal that of the Globex Corporation, its subsidiaries or shareholders. Batteries not included)