Topic: How does this forum differ from a dictatorial regime (Read 455 times)

I am afraid you are right, just persons do not exist here with the exception of very few, it is just a bunch of trust abusers who is given power and they have been abusing the hell out of it from quite some time now, about 3-4 years. A simple fact which for me shows this is that take a look at how a few of the trust abusers have been promoted , by abusing trust system. Anyway I am locking this , the Dt bullshit propaganda is enough for everyone.

Again I wish bitcoin prosper but without these pigs who are doing the worst evil to the great creation of Satoshi.

You have been given several answers, they just don't fit your preconceived notions and so you have ignored them. What you are actually looking for is an answer which will fit your narrative, and I'm afraid that you are unlikely to find that here.

Pharmacist , Lauda and marlboroza the worst trust abusers here I do not care about my account, it is in red since January 2018 but I am a member of this forum and I have the right to free speech like anyone else here. I still want an answer how does this forum differ from a dictatorship regime.

The funny thing is I was under Lauda in a signature and my story was known back then, he didn't give me negative then but today when his interest was hit by my words. Not that I care just want to show the worst double standards that happen in this so called unmoderated forum.

So, I don't have a counter argument... even thought I immediately responded with counter argument? I am condescending not because a sense of grandiosity, but due to the fact I find you not to be intellectually honest, and I think you are projecting more than a little bit.

The question is not if people can walk away, it is what is the cost of them walking away? If people have no incentive to cooperate and invest in a community, what is going to be left of it? What is going to be the resulting quality of interaction here?

I am trying to get everyone involved in this matter to realize we NEED a standard of evidence for leaving negative ratings of either theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws. Unless that line is drawn as a basic standard the trust system will never be anything more than noise, confusion, enabling scams, and drama. Maybe Theymos makes the rule. Maybe we all mutually agree on it, maybe just some of us do.

Perhaps I may seem "angry all the time" because I am being dog piled, slandered, dismissed, etc by various people who would rather make this a drama than a discussion, because this discussion might change things for them.

Plus I'm assuming OP is referring to getting red trust from a DT member, which doesn't "ruin" any account.  You can still post and read and probably do as many trades as you like here.  

It's also not a case of DT members not liking members.  Bitcointalk has written rules and a bunch of unwritten rules as well.  Most noobs don't care enough about the forum to get to know what the unwritten rules are before jumping in and doing stupid shit--like buying an account, for instance.  All they care about is using bitcointalk as a money-making machine, and they don't care if they make it difficult for anyone to find genuinely useful posts by writing a mountain of garbage.  

If it wasn't for that small, active group of DT members who've taken a stand against shenanigans, this place would be all but useless.  It's bad enough that scams aren't moderated--DT members have to do the tagging, and those members also feel responsible for keeping the forum as clean as it can be as far as everything else that isn't moderated.  

It's not anything personal.  Does anyone think I wanted to give Lutpin and lightlord negs for their shitty campaign management?  Nope.  Someone had to, and notice you didn't see cryptohunter or his posse or anyone else helping out.  I happen to like Lutpin, yet I tagged him anyway because of his behavior.  Lightlord I don't know, and he appears to have had less responsibility than Lutpin and I've since removed his tag.  Anyway, it's stuff like that that tends to get missed when making broad generalizations about what's perceived as a small group with a lot of power.

Edit:  I'd also like to add that this "small group" doesn't even always agree with one another, as in the case of me tagging Rambotnic and DarkStar_ leaving a counter-positive.  There have been quite a few instances of that as well.  It's not always a simple matter trying to make the right call, and mistakes do get made.  Fortunately if one DT member messes up, 1) he won't stay on DT if it's consistent, and 2) other DT members will speak their minds and won't just blindly go along with it.  I expect DT members (and others) to tell me if they think I made a bad call.

I'm getting really tired of this tactic of yours. I'm not exactly blown away by your intellectual prowess and I recognize your condescension is just a veil over not being able to produce actual counterarguments. This forum is littered with people exactly like you. Get over yourself. Furthermore, people can just walk away, they do every day, and they should if it makes them as distraught as it does you.


That's exactly what theymos is trying to do by democratizing the DT system. You on the other hand... I have no idea what you're trying to do. You seem to just be angry all the time.


OK, so present the idea to the board. Or, just theymos. Or both. However you see fit.


I never said I do. You, on the other hand, did... Most people that don't like the forum leave. Maybe its in your own best interest if you considered following suit.

You might want to look up what the world hyperbole means. Also people contribute to this place as well even if it is the private property of Theymos. He has sought to decentralize its leadership some what. People spend lots of time, money, and energy building reputations and industries on this forum. Acting like people can just walk away without penalty, or that these things have no real world effects is just infantile.

Yes it does sound like every society ever, perhaps we should take lessons from those systems of law and apply them here? Such as a standard of evidence for accusations and some form of due process. I don't speak for most people, but you do?

Some interesting related reading:

https://managemagazine.com/article-bank/leadership/toxic-leaders-destroy-people-organisations/

https://coachfederation.org/blog/the-rise-of-toxic-leaders-in-organizations-2

It's really not. Its not a "regime" that we are all forced live under. We're all here voluntarily.


It's many more things than that. Everybody guides their own user experience of what they want to get out of the forum.


1. Sounds like every single other community or society that has ever existed.
2. You don't speak for "what most people desire."

Again, nobody is forcing anybody to be here, and if they don't like it, they can leave. Or better yet, create their own forum.

It seems that it is not dictatorial regime as you are allowed to talk to yourself and vouch for your own tips.


So how should we call system where you are allowed to "buy" your own tips, vouch for them from proven alt account which is maybe bought from known scammer? Not dictatorship?

Should there not be some other differences?

You are free to leave. This makes a lot of difference when comparing to a dictatorial regime.

This is incorrect.

As I have proven many times.

Well, you could argue it is a real reason but not a valid reason if you want the trust score to mean anything.

What if I started red trusting people because they refused to scam people? You can see it may be a "real" reason but this is not a valid reason is it? Then I gave green trust to scammers because they did scam. It is a real reason but again not a valid reason in terms of red trust mean to be for untrustworthy and green trust trust worthy.

Same as if i started to red trust people who alerted others to wrong doing. This is the opposite of what the trust system is there for.

Now when the entire list of DT condones this then yes you can start to reason there is some kind of system in place that allows this behaviour that needs to be looked at and restrictions put in place if you want the trust scores to actually help in avoiding persons that may scam you.

@foxpup

i guess it makes no real difference it is all one small circle ... sweet or savoury ... then again both of those are likely to be savoury. Better start with those 2 then finish with your  fav  Huge Black Woman aka the pharmacist.

Well, "confused" was perhaps too strong a word. I was just a little... unclear as to whether I should lick Lauda's arse or suchmoon's first.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. Sorry, suchmoon, you'll have to wait your turn.

What kind of communism so you see here: Marxism or
maoism?
None user tags or bans anyone without real/valid reason(s). As I see you got red trust and that's the reason of this thread. Can you visit forum, post, create thread and use all forum functions? Yes, so how is the life od your account ended? Saw your trusted feedback, there are valid references and comments given, so you didn't got it without reason. At first think maybe something is wrong with you rather than blaming forum for nothing.
Theymos isn't dictator, very loyal to be fair. He is very busy too, in democracy people are judged too, without it there would be a chaos. Absolute freedom doesn't exist nowhere.
Also it isn't dictatorism when someone spams, spreads lies, tries to scam and gots what he/she deserves.


According to coinmarketcap and according to every source expect Roger Ver's shit, bitcoin is leader. Everytime it's accepted in services, even it's possible now in Ohio to pay tax in crypto. Blockchain technologies (which has strong relationship with bitcoin) are integrated in a lot of services, everytime bitcoin gets attention and becomes popular. Marlboroza, DarkStar_ Lauda and other DT members can't affect bitcoin' progress...

System itself means rules.  So when we enter any system we are governed by rules.  Without rules it will be unsystematic.  It will prove more painful.
Manual decisions can never be 100% error free.   But it does not mean that we should not take lesson from our past mistakes.  Repeated or intentional mistakes (if any), only can be termed as dictatorial.  

While this thread title is obviously extremely hyperbolic, I think the question in concept is at least a valid one. There is something to be said for the concept of due process, and there are real consequences for ignoring dissent. In the case of this forum it is essentially a giant engine of drama and scams. When rules apply to some people but not others not only is confusion created but disregard for the authority of those that wield it in general. In the end this fast and loose style talks lots of freedom and decentralization, and delivers lots of cliques, systemic abuse, and results counter to what most people desire in their user experience.

I don't even think that this forum is near the state of communism nor do I see any kind of dictatorship. Bounty hunters gets their payment in full without any admin having a slice from upcoming ICOs (including the scam ones) can freely post their ANN thread without any approval from the admin or the section moderator first, and people can post nonsense as much as they can that would end up flooding the forum with spam. You can post anything or do business here there are just some cases that if you broke a rule you will receive a negative feedback for it.

Let me furnish you with some possible explanations that you are obviously are unable to conceive of by yourself. Perhaps you are not a native speaker of English. Perhaps he is not saying bitcoin itself will cease to function but rather adoption of bitcoin may be damaged if people start to relate the community surrounding to to a corrupt regime.

Now imagine you hear about bitcoin. So you run a google search and find a forum that is related to bitcoin.

Next you read an interesting thought provoking  post but notice this glowing red message next to the posters name telling you that you need to treat them with extreme caution.


So you decide to research why that is.

Then you discover this person is apparently untrustworthy and requires extreme caution before dealing with them ...because they told the truth about another person telling a lie. You feel that is a bit strange. That is kind of the other way around in the real world based on your experiences.

Then you discover the person that gave them red trust for telling the truth was actually the proven liar and his 2 friends that were implicated in an extortion scheme and other dark and shady dealings.

Then you go to meta and see a bunch of other people (apparently trust system controllers) all supporting these actions and that liars are now in positions of trust and people that tell the truth are untrustworthy.

You then think fuck this shit I am out of here. Let's forget about that for now. Sounds fucked up to me.

Do you start to see?

@ fox poop

You are always confused hence why you should never be a merit source. They are the same gang now since merit cyclers with 250 cycled merits are the key positions in the trust system. For some unknown reason the more trust you are proven to cycle the more trustworthy you become.

Very sad that I understand what you are writing about.
Sooner or later, any dictatorial regime ceases to exist. For this you need a larger number of people who disagree with such a regime. Play by the rules and everything will be fine.

Disclaimer: this message does not call anyone to act against something on the forum. 

This. There are way too many self-entitled people abusing this forum in every concievable way and then blaming others once their abuse is followed by consequences.

FTFY, and yes it is the later.