Topic: DT2 SUCHMOON ABUSE.Who voted him into trust circle ? - page 3. (Read 24318 times)

Thanks for reminding me that suchmoon wasn't in my trust list. I've now added him, and I apologise for this omission.

It has been long clarified that negative trust =/= scammer. The only one continuously spreading this false notion that negative trust must mean that you are a scammer is Quickseller.

Here it goes the next 2 abuses of DT members from the same group.

The first one tagging just because he feels so not even claiming i'm somebody


So because some say i'm an alt of thule and some say i'm an old of cryptohunter i'm getting tagged as scammer by another DT member.
You pathetic underhuman forget tagging me as an alt of QS.

Is that the quality DT members are tagging members here?Any more question why DT members are being called abusers and scammers?
So no evidence and he even doesn't care just made the assumption because somebody say that i'm an alt of an untrustworthy account.

If thats not a DT ABUSE of it finest


and here another one from the same group of course



So now i'm getting tagged as scammer for being mad ?
Is it now even not allowed to be mad on that forum ?Any other rules i missed from our beloved DT members?

Wow what pathetic replies you guys are doing.

First of all the master peace of suchmoon


If thats not the total proof of DT's abuse i don't know.Bitcointalk always denied to make this kind of decission because of the abuse.Here Suchmoon even admits that he taggs without much proof because the account is a noob.You just decided that noob accounts have other rights than established accounts.

@Theymos i guess you need to change the principles of this forum as its clearly showing of a centralised power trip

Also the poor try of thepharmacist to defame me again because of that alt account.
I don't know if he ever read the unoffical rules which has been updated.
There is cleary said that the use of multiple accounts is allowed on bitcointalk as long as the account hasn't been bought.
You wanna tell me that i bought that account ?
You DT members are so pathetic you don't even follow your own unoffical rules.
You set rules daily as you are pleased to justify your abuse.

Also suchmoon is playing clearly judge who doesn't need any evidences just assumptions.
What he makes are possibilities calculation.So you tagg people based on possibilities ratio.
Which Ratio is it nor allowed to go under?Is it enough to be possible 1:1000 to be someone to get tagged or even 1:1.000.000 ?

All explanations are just junk shit to justify his abuse.
He first tagged me and later tried to find evidence.
Something like that is in reality called police state .
The whole crypto niche was created to leave these bs and bitcointalk was created with the intense that noone can be unjustified called a scammer.
Now have a look where suchmoon and his group drove that board.People getting called scammer ,their accounts destroyed and because of what ?Because of their personal assumption if you really wanna belive on their poor argumentation.

You as DT members just proofed to be pathetic and to not even be able to uphold rules on your in your own group.
You are clearly on a power trip and the community is tired of it.
That group had always excuses that these are just a few alts.How does it come that topic isn't ending anymore for over a year and more and more people are getting tired of that bs ?

So here you have the hard proof.I'm not thule there are no evidences and still i'm tagged as scammer/alt of him and the DT1 member gives shit about it.He doesn't care if there is real evidence or not.He just admited he will stay at his personal assumption and no DT member is going to question his action without providing hard proof.

You just proofed again that the claims of all the hundreds of members yelling of abuse have been right since you can clearly see your tagging is no rational no justified.

Also the targeted false claim of thepharmacist aka racist bitch against thule just shows what poor level you DT member are.
He intentionaly spraid false info that thule were selling accounts.
Please show me where thule were selling accounts since i read all his red trust from your group carefully and he never sold a single account on bitcointalk.
You defamed and accused someone again for something he never died.


IF THAT THE STANDARD DT MEMBERS ARE USING ?IS THAT THE ROLE MODEL DT MEMBERS ARE SHOWING TO THE COMMUNITY ?

Also it was mentioned it was proofed that me and thule are from the same region ?How come i haven't seen that proof ?
What same region are you talking about ?
Would be nice to know what you are accusing me.

These 23 votes are only from DT1. There's more DT2 and other members who voted for suchmoon during selection of default trust.

Without proper evidence OP you can't blame on a DT like suchmoon. This forum isn't a place to show your emotions. As a active DT member suchmoon is one who works every single hour to make bitcointalk safer for newbies.

Nowdays a common things happening too much that when a DT taging someone with valid reason from that moment number of combined gang members starts to blame on DT. I think its not fair. Its making the situation much complicated.These guys are opening spam thread for every single taging. If this happens continiously on forum i think newbies of bitcointalk will be hesitated to works here.

In my opinion we should stop replying on this kind of meaningless thread. Basically its kinda tough not to give reply because instantly i am replying here on this thread to let everyone know about this. Ignore is best button for us

It's a newbie. Of course it takes more evidence to red-tag an established account, as seen in my feedback on mdayonliner/S_Therapist. But it's gonna be a zoo here if we start demanding the same level of proof for total noobs, self-admittedly posting just to poke some users in the eye.

And yes, linguistic proof combined with the other stuff mentioned in the reference is enough for this newbie. No chance this can be a coincidence. I'd rather believe all those ETH-address-sharing alts are indeed "friends and family" than the OP being not Thule. Anyone disagreeing with that feel free to counter the rating, red-trust me, un-include me, exclude me, include Thule and cryptohunter - numerous options are available and I don't retaliate so don't worry about that.


There is nothing particularly controversial about this rating other than your attempt to help the OP to blow it out of proportion. By your twisted logic I shouldn't be leaving any ratings at all because there is no recourse for anyone tagged by me - in addition to your point about me not trading, I also don't give a shit about any "positions" on the forum so exclusions/public shaming/banning won't work either. Well, banning kinda works for any future red tags so you might want to pursue that route.

There is already discussion about that in the form of a charter https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49306851

Rather than "rules" there can be common ground and agreement while the more subjective issues can be discussed and a general consensus can be made on how to handle it.

Somehow I don't think the entire community could come up with its own criteria.  For one thing, only a minority would take the time to give their input and/or vote.  Remember when Theymos put the 1-merit requirement in place in order for Newbies to rank up to Jr. Members?  The day that went into effect, I recall quite a few posts from Jr. Members who'd gotten busted down to Newbie rank saying "Why didn't we get to vote on this?".  And the truth is that it was being discussed in Meta for months, and they were all too busy with their bounties to do any reading. 

Another thing is that any community resolution (assuming that it's even possible to get all the voters to agree on anything) isn't going to satisfy everyone.  So unless the rules for leaving trust came from Theymos and were enforced by mods, there would just be more bickering, more drama, and more chaos.  Because if the community somehow agreed to have certain criteria, no one would be forced to abide by it.  There would be counter-negs and counter-positives and complaints and everything else that we already see with the current system.

I would have no problem if Theymos set down some guidelines as far as what DT members can and can't do--but I seriously doubt he's going to step in to regulate the trust system when he's basically taken a hands-off approach thus far.  I suspect he wants the community to police itself, especially since scams aren't even moderated here. 

they do have proof and sometimes its self inflicted.  a guy confessing he has alt and later discovered he sent merits to his alt is just one of the evidence.

The OP being an "admitted alt" is not evidence of guilt, nor wrongdoing. It is certainly plausible he is an alt of a reputable person afraid of negative consequences for being critical of Suchmoon (the question of if this fear is based on actual instances of Suchmoon engaging in this kind of behavior is another discussion).

No, the OP has not done anything for him to gain respect/trust/power -- this point was made in regards to theymos' comment that controversial ratings should carry an actual risk/cost by way of a retaliatory rating, and there does not appear to be any risk/cost to suchmoon in this case.

No, it should not be surprising I disagree with the underlying rating (at least in regards to the rating you left). Similarly, it is not surprising to me you left the rating you did. You think the sale of accounts allows scams to happen (and otherwise harms the forum), and I believe the sale of accounts makes it more difficult for certain scams to happen -- this is a difference of opinion, and I don't think you leave these ratings to help your business, nor to harm the forum. I am happy to discuss this somewhere else if you wish, however I doubt I will change your mind, and you probably will not change my mind.

I am a little more concerned about the rating Suchmoon left

I respect your thoughts as most of the time they are satisfactory and straight forward, also I am not being fooled in anyway by the DT- trolling happening lately in meta and other parts of the forum. I would rather give a personal opinion which I think has a sense of Justice in it.

Firstly we don't have specific rules for neg-tag which is a very big problem for now as most of the negative feedbacks are posted with not enough proof or not under any universal value. This not only makes DT look harassing and monopolized to others but also makes people think that it's just a group of people imposing rules for profitable gains or power. But if a forum endorsed set of rules for tagging would be applied here it would just put a stop to the troll as no one would directly oppose the administration as its there show already.

This case too refers to the same thing as there is no base for the neg-tag. OP thinks its a abuse of trust system and the person who tagged thinks he is right at his own set of rules to tag which he has in mind.

Yes, let's get out the posse and bring suchmoon to justice for improperly tagging a throw away noob account.   

Perhaps we can try suchmoon in one of those kangaroo courts crytohunter has set up in reputation. You know, the ones where only the accused and accusers are allowed to show up. all advocate responses are deleted.

Certainly there's a chance that Thule is the wrong alt, but OP admitted to being an alt of someone here and clearly that someone has a huge gripe with Lauda and other DT members.  Add that to the similar language oddities, and it really isn't that far of a stretch.  OP said his main account was Legendary, while Thule is a Sr. Member--but who knows how many accounts he has, anyway?  

My guess is that OP's main account is already tagged by DT and he therefore doesn't have much to lose by posting with it.  I think he just wants to play the victim, having to create a new account so that those evil DT members won't give him a neg *such injustice!  much victim!*.

Don't be fooled by the illusion of all these noob accounts who seem to be supporting the anti-DT trolling campaign.  Expect to see more of them emerge.  You can count on that.  Cryptohunter et al see that they're not getting any genuine support for their arguments, so they have to knit some socks.  It's transparent, and it would be laughable if it weren't so insulting that they think the community is stupid enough to fall for it.

The OP is an admitted alt account and registered yesterday.  Do you think he did anything that would earn him any respect/trust/power?

If you're talking about Thule, it's not surprising you'd disagree with the trust he got.  He's an account seller, which is what I tagged him for.  Other DT members tagged him for that and for misusing the trust system and threatening behavior.  Anyone reading this is welcome to see for themselves.

Right, unless there is some undisclosed evidence, the evidence Alex has only shows the OP likely lives/lived in the same general area as the person the OP is being accused an alt of.

Being that the OP effectively has no power, any retaliatory feedback the OP gives will do nothing.

All this ignores the fact that the person the OP is being accused being an alt of has negative trust for very shaky reasons in the first place.

I would hopefully agree with you on this as @suchmoon has sent a very irrational and evidence less negative feedback on the OP. You just cannot say 2 persons are equal if they have a bit similarity's in spacing and paragraph formations as there are many people here who could have similarly in writing or could have been inspired by others to write in there fashion.

I personally think the negative feedback is fact less and there should be more clear proofs of being guilty before tagging anyone as an alt.

I am not sure where you got 25 from.

In order to be on DT1, you must be trusted by 10 people with at least 10 merit, one of which must have 250 merit, both ignoring merit sent by the person, assuming you are not blacklisted by theymos.

Only one person needs to be convinced, theymos, as he can blacklist Alex from being on DT1. Otherwise, 15 people will need to remove Alex from their trust lists.

It would probably be best for her not to be in a position of authority, as she appears to always side with those with more power in disputes. Also, she does not appear to have any kind of trading history, nor currently is active in trading, which effectively removes any consequences to her receiving any retaliatory ratings.

The stats prove merit is cycled
Bpip demonstrates this group cycles it
DT support lists demonstrates this group includes excludes as a group to a large extent
DT key positions are the earned 250 merits ... cycled merits very useful here

Not hard to understand there is no imagination required.

Just saw the system.
WTF who implemented such a stupid system.
No wonder Lauda and his gang took over control of DT members since they place now majority of their own people into DT and detrust their enemies.
A more stupid system wasn't possible ?

That gang pushing each other so even if they abuse there is no chance anymore to hold them repsonsible since they control the majority.
You just need to look at the DT members who have other opinion than Lauda and you instantly see his whole group instantly distrusting.

Its a clear power fight.
Am really asking myself wtf theymos is doing.His execution are so full of crap.
Is he blind?

You will also get support if you leave valid feedback. Coolcryptovator is not here from a long time. But he is in DT1 member if I am correct, what makes him DT1? Isn't because he leaves valid feedback towards other people? Despite having negative trust from him, I still set him as DT0 in my trust list because I know he leaves valid feedback. If you also provide valid feedback, you will also be included by others and that's how suchmoon was also included. Why are you messing it up with your imagined "Circle"? Well, everyone is free to think.

Why? It is good that some of the OG regulars on the WO thread, who could give two shits about what goes on here in Meta, can add whoever they want.