Topic: Hhampuz a DT member is Abusing the trust system? (Read 1021 times)

You said it, not me:


And you decided to respond to the thread... fueling the drama. Stupid.

---

Finally, I can be proud to say that I now own the gang. Ah yes, the gang that rules over the forum with an iron fist. We have theymos wrapped around our finger and the various moderators ready to censor at-will.


Centralize! Centralize!
We are the gang of Default Trust!

Centralize! Centralize!
We farm merit among to fuel our lust!

Centralize! Centralize!
Stop account traders stealing our campaigns!

Centralize! Centralize!
Good old boys will never back down!

dont embrace your dumbness,im here to justify your little gang's stupidity.

Yes. That is exactly what you are doing right now.

sounds like hHampuz is doing the old tactics of marlboroza,the exclude me drama? do you think we are stupid enough to ride with your dramas?

Well then if you are implying you don't care about maintaining any reputation here, why does my criticism of your use of the trust system bother you so much?

I'm extremely butt hurt!! *Angry*!

Honestly, if you can't see further than your own nose, I can't be arsed to take you seriously

As for my reputation with the "actual members of this community", take a good look at what I've been doing lately and you'll find an answer real quick about how much I care for any reputation I have. This forum is not the be all end all tecshare! You should know (:

Asking to be removed from the default trust does not take away one's ability to use the trust system here, but this all needs to be applied in the context by which he not only asked to be removed, but what the rating itself is for. Does this rating actually serve the community or is it more likely Hhampuz is just agitated he had to lose income due to public pressure and is now lashing out at people he sees as easy targets? Do any of you honestly believe the rating he left is going to protect anyone? He asked to be removed from the default trust as soon as people started putting pressure on him due to his managing of the Livecoin signature campaign. These two events are not only clearly linked, but quite hypocritical as he by any standard served to lend Livecoin far more credibility than any signature holder.

Finally after shirking his public service in the form of the default trust under very modest criticism, he then again wants to take advantage of the trust system to sooth his butt hurt over the whole situation by over correcting in the other direction by being excessive with his ratings now. Free of the fear of public sanction of being removed from the default trust, he can use this to psychologically compensate for being coerced into take an action by public pressure to give him a sense of control. This all in context is quite contradictory and not honorable behavior.

As I said before Hhampuz, you are only hurting your own actual reputation, not in some ranking system, but with the actual people in the community through this kind of behavior. I am just one of the few people that will tell you to your face whether you want to hear it or not, the rest just quietly whisper it behind your back.

I don't think that's contradictory at all but see how it can appear that way. Facts are though feedback left should be used based on your personal standards nothing more nothing less. Asking to be excluded from the DT system does not take away ones ability or right on the forum to leave Feedback to suite their needs. What this leaves people with the 3 tools at their disposal here, including them in their trust list if they agree, excluding them from their trust list if they disagree or doing nothing if they don't have an opinion or care to act; based on the members feedback. The system will work itself out over time.

Here we have Hhampuz using the system to suite their needs for feedback on accounts. The rest of us can decide how valuable their feedback is, consider this the chance for criticism. I have excluded Hhampuz because they asked for that and I previously had them in my trusted list. I've recently begun respecting the wishes of those in my trust list if they choose to not participate, if needed I will always see it in untrusted eventually.

 

What is this, inside thy bum?
Oh yes, right past the rectum!
T'is a broom with girth and grit
Shoved so far your mouth's full of shit

Well if they are promoting a scam may it be on purpose or unknowingly you are definitely a person not to be trusted. Sig campaigns are like ICOs before you even join one you must know what you are promoting is something that won't damage your reputation or affect in anyway your activity as a member here in BCT. Most members here just see the money or how they will get paid from it but they don't see what damage it would bring if members have been scammed because of what they are promoting. If we including morality as a criteria here then they do deserve a tag from any DT member, I know most of the time they are given the chance to remove their signatures/applications as a warning before they receive a tag but most of them act like they don't see it.

That's simple.

If someone promotes a scam for a few bucks, anyone dealing with this user is at risk. Especially when 'larger' amounts are involved.
How shall i trust someone who would do anything for a few bucks ?

For my part, i decided to distrust anyone enrolled in the campaign.
I won't do any business at all with people who promote scammy shady and illegal activities.

I watched the video which reminds me about izoombies, honestly.

Performance Artist

artist )

They said that but Hhampuz is not pro community but pro self and some DTs are closing their eyes on this.


There's nothing strange here, I am not against on blacklist as it is their prerogative, I'm more concern on how the trust system is abuse.

Negative - You think that trading with this person is high-risk

It is the correct definition, so if you are wearing Livecoin signature, trading with you is a high-risk?

---

To Hhampuz, if more than 10,000 members are wearing the livecoin signature, will you tag them all?

It has nothing to do with my approval. Your own actions and statements are contradictory of themselves. You don't want to make the effort to participate in building the trust system, but you still want to participate in it when it serves you, free of criticism of course.

I agree and I think it's better decision than tag Livecoin participants.
I just thought that's a bit strange that OP didn't said nothing against you both. Following his logic you also had to blacklist participants of Sportsbet, Bitcasino, Yobit, Betcoin and some other campaigns.

The fuck are you babbling about? Anyone can and should post trust feedback as they deem necessary regardless of their willingness or fitness to be in DT.

I've been thinking about this too. It is not like Livecoin scammed hundreds of people. This is an unprofessional exchange being run by amateurs who don't even know how to write a proper ToS or care enough to hire someone who knows how to do so.

Did Livecoin fuck izoomrud over? Yes they did indeed. (against izoomrud's claims they couldn't show any palpable defense)

But there are hundreds of those examples. There are shitton of locked account reports about poloniex as well. (or there used to be, I remember a few) But nobody from poloniex is around, nobody's running a sig camp for polo, so no noise.

Livecoin and their alt account got red'ed and flagged and...

I believe camp participants shouldn't be red trusted for that but on the other hand I don't want Livecoin promoting their exchange without solving the izoomrud's issue neither.

Tagging the participants is an extreme measure but not tagging them means Livecoin can do as they please like something haven't happened at all.

Hard to decide.

***All livecoin has to do is; unlock izoom's account. He probably won't be able withdraw any MONA's since there is no MONA's but I remember he told that he had btc on his account too. Let him withdraw and everybody's happy. About his MONA balance, I didn't hear anybody (at least around here in this forum) complaining about their mona balance. If it becomes a mass scamming by Livecoin, then sig camp participants should be tagged indeed.

The world isn't black and white, nor are DT members and all their actions. DT isn't a get together social club where everyone sits down and chats about every single forum issue over a beer each day, and then collectively agrees what to do.  It's also not all DT members duty to look in to any of this. Some will, some wont, some wont have time, some will be helping doing other stuff, and some won't be helping out anywhere.  DT isn't a technical job. Though many are great members who do help out a ton. 

If this were bitconnect I would likely tag campaign members until they left it. I was well versed on that topic so it makes sense.   Some DT members would refrain for whatever reasons that may be completely legit.  There's a lot going on here.  DT are not paid moderators here either. 

Using an alt account to bash Hhampuz is the latest thing to do it seems.  Clearly a coordinated effort of late. Buck up and post from your real account if you want to have any sort of legitimacy, which you won't because you would have already had your actual account been a legitimate one.