Sometimes I ask myself if I made a mistake by adding most of the trolls and attention-seeking users along with the general riff-raff to my IGNORE list because I seem to be missing out on large chunks of the picture when reading posts by those users I quite enjoy reading.
All things said and done I see no reason to unIGNORE those that cause friction within the forum, it is better for me to keep ignoring them all.
Topic: More trust abuse by marlboroza - page 2. (Read 3589 times)
Actually the feedback I left Vod is documented fact. No one disputes Vod doxed OGNasty and claimed to have reported him to the IRS. As far as the comment regarding his mental state, I have repeatedly offered to modify the rating and replace it excluding that part if he feels that would make it a valid rating, but he refuses to respond. Vod avoids a direct response at all costs, because he is well aware his actions are indefensible.
How is what vod will do in the future a documented fact and not an assumption? Do you have a crystal ball or something? Does vod have access to everyones doxx?
I understand he doxxed OG, but that's not proof he will doxx anyone else who criticizes him.
Yes it's an assumption. But it's not baseless.
The feedback you've left him is also an assumption. And also not baseless.
We all make assumptions all the time, including you. There's no need to point it out every time.
The feedback you've left him is also an assumption. And also not baseless.
We all make assumptions all the time, including you. There's no need to point it out every time.
Yes, baseless. It is like seeing a guy eating a sandwich, and some one yells "HEY YOU STOLE THAT SANDWICH!" Only he didn't see the sandwich get stolen, he just assumed it was, either because the person yelling doesn't like the guy eating the sandwich or has some issues of their own. Then when asked for proof the only response is "Well it looked like a sandwich I saw stolen before, so it must be!"
Actually the feedback I left Vod is documented fact. No one disputes Vod doxed OGNasty and claimed to have reported him to the IRS. As far as the comment regarding his mental state, I have repeatedly offered to modify the rating and replace it excluding that part if he feels that would make it a valid rating, but he refuses to respond. Vod avoids a direct response at all costs, because he is well aware his actions are indefensible.
That is not very specific Vod.
Stop ignoring questions if you want others to answer, troll. You accuse marlboroza in this thread; he is allowed to defend himself.
Because he has.
Check the reference link for the negative feedback he left you for abusing the trust system.
I get it, you don't agree that with him - but he's already explained why he did it and it's been explained to you countless times. Continuing to ask won't change anything.
Check the reference link for the negative feedback he left you for abusing the trust system.
I get it, you don't agree that with him - but he's already explained why he did it and it's been explained to you countless times. Continuing to ask won't change anything.
He really hasn't. The reference is nutlduuh making assumptions about why I included people based on nothing whatsoever. As you can see above Nutilduuh freely admitted it was nothing but an assumption. If assumptions are the standard of evidence then I guess we can assume you and Vod both get together to rob children of their milk money. Making baseless assumptions is fun!
Yes it's an assumption. But it's not baseless.
The feedback you've left him is also an assumption. And also not baseless.
We all make assumptions all the time, including you. There's no need to point it out every time.
Because he has.
Check the reference link for the negative feedback he left you for abusing the trust system.
I get it, you don't agree that with him - but he's already explained why he did it and it's been explained to you countless times. Continuing to ask won't change anything.
Check the reference link for the negative feedback he left you for abusing the trust system.
I get it, you don't agree that with him - but he's already explained why he did it and it's been explained to you countless times. Continuing to ask won't change anything.
He really hasn't. The reference is nutlduuh making assumptions about why I included people based on nothing whatsoever. As you can see above Nutilduuh freely admitted it was nothing but an assumption. If assumptions are the standard of evidence then I guess we can assume you and Vod both get together to rob children of their milk money. Making baseless assumptions is fun!
So Vod, clearly I abuse the trust system according to you... why is it whenever anyone asks you to substantiate your claims you can never do it and always default to just claiming you already have?
Because he has.
Check the reference link for the negative feedback he left you for abusing the trust system.
I get it, you don't agree that with him - but he's already explained why he did it and it's been explained to you countless times. Continuing to ask won't change anything.
What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.
The negative trust you have left for people you do not like.
Or the refusal of the same type of explanations you demand from others.
Don't forget this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52385837
See:
In order to "manufacture timelines", one has to first operate on the assumption that your timeline means anything other than more assumptions on your part. You feel you have some kind of right to not only demand I explain why I included these people, but that it must be done in such a manner commensurate with your demands, or else I am "manufacturing timelines". It is not that you are making baseless assumptions, no, not at all, it is because I am "manufacturing timelines" that my replies don't meet the standards of your demands.
Some of the users I added for the simple reason that I agreed with their trust list. Is this where you tell me again what is a valid reason for me deciding who I do or don't include based on your own personal preferences? Nothing you are accusing me of is anything that couldn't literally be applied to any other member actively using custom trust lists. Much like a fed uses process crimes to charge people with crimes when they have no evidence, you are using the idea that I don't meet your arbitrary standards in your interrogation as "proof" of my guilt. This is all just a game you are playing to pursue your own vendetta.
Not only that there were private communications as well, there is also the fact that I thought their trust lists were also positive additions.
Some of the users I added for the simple reason that I agreed with their trust list. Is this where you tell me again what is a valid reason for me deciding who I do or don't include based on your own personal preferences? Nothing you are accusing me of is anything that couldn't literally be applied to any other member actively using custom trust lists. Much like a fed uses process crimes to charge people with crimes when they have no evidence, you are using the idea that I don't meet your arbitrary standards in your interrogation as "proof" of my guilt. This is all just a game you are playing to pursue your own vendetta.
But since I admittedly can't prove that I know what you were actually thinking or what your actual motivations were, I ask that people look at the body of evidence presented and come to their own conclusions.
There is no "body of evidence". There are a string of assumptions, with accusations stacked on top of them upon which even more assumptions were based. That is not evidence, that is at best theorizing and nothing a trust rating should be based on. Once again, I manufactured nothing. You seem intent on this being some kind of deception, just like all your other assumptions here.
Some of the users I included because I thought their trust lists were beneficial, some of them I included because of their response to the advice concerning the removal of support from a frivolous flag. It is as simple as that, no "manufacturing of timelines" needed. This is purely a projection on your part designed to impugn my character to serve your own personal vendettas, and the vendettas of people like Vod.
Vultures like you saw I was achieving something positive and did a deep dive into my toilet bowl looking for any peanut fragments you could find in order to tarnish this effort that yielded positive results, because if I have a say in the default trust, I will erode the unilateral control and protection from being penalized for your own abuses that you and your friends currently enjoy. All the same people abusing negative ratings against me are all the same peanut hunters that are the most vocal in opposition to my calls for an objective standard of evidence before leaving negative ratings. This is about serving yourself, not about protecting the forum from me.
Some of the users I included because I thought their trust lists were beneficial, some of them I included because of their response to the advice concerning the removal of support from a frivolous flag. It is as simple as that, no "manufacturing of timelines" needed. This is purely a projection on your part designed to impugn my character to serve your own personal vendettas, and the vendettas of people like Vod.
Vultures like you saw I was achieving something positive and did a deep dive into my toilet bowl looking for any peanut fragments you could find in order to tarnish this effort that yielded positive results, because if I have a say in the default trust, I will erode the unilateral control and protection from being penalized for your own abuses that you and your friends currently enjoy. All the same people abusing negative ratings against me are all the same peanut hunters that are the most vocal in opposition to my calls for an objective standard of evidence before leaving negative ratings. This is about serving yourself, not about protecting the forum from me.
So Vod, clearly I abuse the trust system according to you... why is it whenever anyone asks you to substantiate your claims you can never do it and always default to just claiming you already have?
What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.
The negative trust you have left for people you do not like.
Or the refusal of the same type of explanations you demand from others.
Don't forget this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52385837
What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.
The negative trust you have left for people you do not like.
Or the refusal of the same type of explanations you demand from others.
That is not very specific Vod.
What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.
The negative trust you have left for people you do not like.
Or the refusal of the same type of explanations you demand from others.
...If you seek redress from the community for the abuse of the system, they add the abuser and treat the system not only like a joke, but as a tool to harass people...
There is your disconnection, troll. Why would the community help you when you abuse trust? Clean your hands.
What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.
...If you seek redress from the community for the abuse of the system, they add the abuser and treat the system not only like a joke, but as a tool to harass people...
There is your disconnection, troll. Why would the community help you when you abuse trust? Clean your hands.
Seems moderators don't want to remove your post, but I will tag you for lying and maliciously trying to move this topic into different direction, unlike you, I care about default trust system and I don't want abusers and abuser supporters in it, let this "DONE" serve as reference:
@TECSHARE I am asking you again to leave this topic. You are not allowed to post here.
marlboroza 2020-05-26 Reference Liar. Maliciously hijacking topic.
So this is what the trust system is reduced to now is it? If you disagree with people you get a red tag. If you seek redress from the community for the abuse of the system, they add the abuser and treat the system not only like a joke, but as a tool to harass people. This system which is supposed to protect people from fraud is simply a toy for you to play with, and like all naughty little children you should have your toys taken away. If this is the standard for the trust system now, Theymos should probably just scrub negative ratings and go exclusively with flags backed by evidence of theft, contractual violation, or violation of applicable laws. If this community has proven anything, it is that it simply is not mature enough to enforce any kind of self restraint or equitable standards.
Thanks everyone posting for making it public knowledge you treat the trust system as a plaything and actively add people explicitly because they abuse the trust system by leaving negative ratings for the high crime of disagreeing with their accusations.
Be careful - if you trust someone and they ask you not to, do you trust them enough to not trust them?
I've read this few times lol.How do I get on this list?
You will need one of these:
To think I was sitting next to him in the Clown Car all this time, and I was actually riding in the trunk...
Heey, I thought you are the one driving clown car! Damn red nose confused me!~
ElaborateI removed marlboroza from my trust list a long time ago I think because from what I recall he specifically asked to not be added to any list.
So you removed him because he asked? That's trust abuse!
Be careful - if you trust someone and they ask you not to, do you trust them enough to not trust them?
https://youtu.be/EzVxsYzXI_Y?t=89
I removed marlboroza from my trust list a long time ago I think because from what I recall he specifically asked to not be added to any list.
Maybe that has since changed, if it has I would like to add him too.
Maybe that has since changed, if it has I would like to add him too.
Marlboroza should not be in any sane person's trust list who knows what type of abuse they support and even do as noted in this thread itself. Anyone trusting them is supporting groupism and mobbing here overall and is against neutral and unbiased judgement.
Get me out of DT1 ! LoL !
Get me out of DT1 ! LoL !
Here is the real list of marlboroza's filthy enablers (current DT1 who have included him, plus me):
Balthazar
Vod
Foxpup
Avirunes
suchmoon
JayJuanGee
Royse777
LoyceV
actmyname
SFR10
TwitchySeal
xtraelv
crwth
nullius
KTChampions
tvplus006
gospodin
witcher_sense
Alex_Sr
morvillz7z
Coolcryptovator
lovesmayfamilis
DireWolfM14
TalkStar
1miau
YOSHIE
Hmm... one of them you even have included in your own trust list. Better run this by the Objective Standards Guild to see how it fits in with your prescribed principles.
You claim you misspelled it - I think it was trust abuse. 
Could be... To think I was sitting next to him in the Clown Car all this time, and I was actually riding in the trunk...
Jump to: