Topic: Neg tag for opinion about laws. JohhnyUA's trust - page 2. (Read 701 times)

Ban evasion

johhnyUA
Kvanko Banned

Ok, despite i don't ask Veleor about such topic (but i appreciate his attitude to trying to help people), i'm here.

Let's go in order:


There was a little conversation in PM, which i can't disclose (without bob's agreement) in quotes, but close sense of this conversation was the next: I told him that my quote doesn't mean that i'm doing something against the law and it even doesn't mean that i'm appreciate such behavior. He answered that he doesn't mean anything like that, but he can't trust people with such worldview and he needs to warn another people, and let them decide (for that reason there is sentence "Check context" )

I understood that in PM there will not be any productive conversation, but the things i hate even more than controversial red tags in my profile - is shitting and bitching in Reputation. So i butthurted in our local russian thread for a little bit and give up on it. Life continues, you know.

Above replica is also fit for this quote:

---

Exactly. I think the problem in mentality: for Germans (bob123 is from Germany) it's something really terrible to "do not care against the law" at the same time, for many nations living with corrupted governments (like in my country) it's not a question of preferences, it's necessity.

Also, as many of you said above (the same as i said in PM, if IIRC) there too many awful and dangerous laws in our world, which forbid freedom of speech, freedom of trade, freedom to be your own bank and so on.
I can understand why Bob left me this feedback, but i can't accept it (in meaning of acceptance, not like i'm still butthurting about that)

The same answer to
Coolcryptovator


For honest - no. I was pretty clear and i know English at least enough to translate my thoughts correctly to what i mean (most of the time, and this is such case).
There is morality in this world, and laws. Morality is common to all nations, such things like "do not kill, do not steal, do not lie" crossing to many cultures in different times.

Laws is synthetic terms which directly correspond to country which created them. Most of first laws crossed with morality (like laws which forbid stealing) but times passes and there is many laws which at least controversial, but some times they're oppose morality.

And my replica was a statement that i don't accept raw arguments like "it's against the law". Maybe expressed in some rude form.


At first, i wanted to ignore this (about my second feedback) (for example in Dave's replic) but after your "IIRC" i must to answer

No, your memory is playing bad jokes with you. Let me clarify it to you: He used very controversial situation (the argument that i was tagged only by him, noone else tagged me. I will tell you a little more, at first bob123 tagged me about "cheating" but after strong proofs the removed his tag) to sort out with his opponent. Just like personal vendetta.

My feedback is about that this person is a liar, who accused people (not me, important moment) in strong sins without any proofs (just his "view"). So i think, that with such people, who can accuse you in stealing, "corruption" and so on, red trust feedback fit pretty well.  
The only difference between me and Lauda is that Lauda tagged by himself people which accused him in "stealing/corruption/so on" while i tagged someone who accused third party.

Do not thank for clarification.

---

P.S: But again, it's like one year passed i don't want to create another drama. If bob will see it and decide to leave his feedback as it is, when this is his decision and i fine with this. He is at least not a last member in this community and his feedback is in fact do not affect too much.

Neutral assessment is also not suitable here.  Everyone has every right to freely express their opinions and thoughts.

IIRC KTChampions exposed JohhnyUA's sockpuppet and got hit with a retaliatory red trust. Two wrongs don't make it right and all that shit (and I think bob123 should revise that negative rating, and KTChampions' second rating is probably unnecessary) but JohhnyUA is abusing the trust system himself in that case.

It would be nice if bob123 would reconsider its decision and remove the negative tag. I think this is caused by difficulties in translating from Russian to English and taken out of context. If bob123 thinks otherwise, it can replace the negative feedback with a neutral one, because it doesn't deserve a negative tag.

I don't want to add a DT1 member to my distrust list without a strong reason. At first I would like to know his arguments more clearly and I believe that this situation can be resolved peacefully. But it will be another matter if Bob123 doesn't answer. Anyway my single vote won't have a significant effect to his position in the DT list.
I've created this thread, because I believe that the community should achieve a general vision on such type of issues.

If you don't trust someone's feedback then you can place that person to your distrust list. It's simple. Just do it.

Negative feedback doesn't fit for this reason. I have read the references thread linked to the feedback. My government doesn't allow me to use Bitcoin, but still, I am using it. So basically I am working against the government rules of my country. So if I say it verbally here that I don't care government rules about bitcoin then should I get negative feedback? It's pretty clear the reference links was about bitcoin and explaining about an example regarding tax that earning from bitcoin.

I think bob123 should reconsider his feedback, at least should be turned into neutral, and it would be the best solution. I don't know JohhnyUA very well, but a person should be untrusted on the forum just for leaving opinion about a county's rules

IMO we should separate our opinion from facts, even if JohnnyUA "doesn't care about the law" it doesn't mean he is not following them or abide to them also it doesn't mean that he did something illegal. Saying those lines "I don't care about the law" doesn't even incriminate you on any kind of crime it doesn't even get you arrested just by solely saying that so I don't think a negative trust for something you just said in relation to this is worthy of that, only if he said that after he scam someone from Bitcointalk is the only time I would consider a negative tag if I am a DT member.

Perhaps this is not an entirely correct approach to positively address this issue. Why start calls for the removal of bob123 with DT? Conflicts are always easier to resolve by consensus. I don't think bob123 can be a person who is incapable of normal dialogue.

First, the situation that has arisen should be resolved between two opponents between whom mistrust has arisen. For an interested person, you need to remove all your emotions, you should not show your aggression.

But in another case, a person who is endowed with a certain sense of power should behave competently and with dignity.
It is not necessary to show who is in charge here, but on the contrary, try to understand why such a situation has arisen and try to positively resolve this misunderstanding.

Perhaps, to express your distrust, it is enough to leave the tilde, which has been standing for a long time.

What about freedom of speech? bob123 doesn't respect all of us if he does this. DT are the best people on our forum. bob123 shames that title.

Looking at johhnyUA's feedback I would be a bit more distrustful of him based on the feedback left by KTChampions then the ones by bob123
However, since I don't know KTChampions if I was doing a trade with JohhnyUA I would still have to spend time poking around their posts to see what is going on.

But, since you have let JohhnyUA and Bob123 know about this post, and it's been a few days and neither has come here to post, I don't think either one cares that much.

Just my view.

-Dave

I think bob123 should be removed from the DT members.  We are on a cryptocurrency forum.  And not on the forum of tax inspectors or the forum of the municipal police.  What does he allow himself?  Why did bob123 do this?  Why offended the principled crypto trader of 2016?  I think bob123 is not worthy of being a DT.

Well, I viewed the message from where the quote was made. And there is a worldview position about the place of law in human life. We all know that there could be illegal laws and laws that can conflict with basic human rights and freedoms. Placing morals and ethics higher than law is not even unpopular opinion as suggested above, it is a very popular belief, and many archaic laws are being cancelled because they don't correspond to the ideas of good and evil of modern man. Some obsolescent laws that are not being cancelled yet are also not being applyed by the same reason.

So I definitely agree that leaving a negative feedback in the trust system for a worldview position is incorrect.

I've notified JohhnyUA and Bob123 about this topic. Hope they will appear here and settle the conflict.


JohhnyUA wanted to create a topic in Reputation as soon as he received a negative trust from Bob123. He said that in the Russian section, but then for some reason changed his mind. However, I believe that negative feedback is wrong, especially from a DT member, and such reviews undermine the credibility of the entire forum trust system.

Hmm.  Looks like all the feedback bob123 has sent since the one in question has been valid.  I didn't look at feedback left for members prior to that one, but I did take a look at pretty much all of the ones afterward and I don't see any instances of abuse, much less a pattern.

This looks to me like one wrongly-left neg among a great number of ones that were left for valid reasons.  Hopefully bob123 might revisit this one, but if not I don't think it makes a case for kicking him off DT or anything like that.  Quite a few DTs have controversial feedbacks, as I'm sure you're aware, Veleor.

DT2 from June 2019 / DT1 from November 2019

Lol, that trust is pretty unjustified IMO.  JohnnyUA was saying he didn't care if not paying taxes was against the law, he's comfortable doing it.  I mean, come on.  This is a cryptocurrency forum after all, and I'd say a lot of us really have a deep, abiding hatred toward the tax man.  I'm sure a lot of people don't write about it in their posts, but I'm fairly certain  a lot of members here do or have evaded paying taxes in one form or another in their life.  Bob123 might be a saint in that regard, but I don't think it warrants leaving a neg on someone else's trust page because they disagree.

I don't happen to think so, but the trust system allows it.  If johhnyUA wants that feedback removed, I'm sure he knows that it'll have to be worked out between him and bob123.  They're not newbies and they know how things work.

Edit:  I don't know how to check this fact: how long has bob123 been on DT?

I would like to discuss the negative feedback that was sent to Legendary johhnyUA from Default Trust member bob123.

I've asked bob123 in PM on this case six months ago, but there was no response from him.


What Bitcointalk community thinks about this comment?



I believe that there are unspoken ethical rules that help people coexist together and build a harmonious community, as well as state laws which do not always help people, but sometimes restrict their freedom. By using cryptocurrencies in some countries, you do not violate anything, while in other countries you will be punished. So, is it right to blame people and mark them with a negative trust if they don't agree to obey such laws?



[Map: Legal Status of Cryptocurrencies]


I will also quote a well-known history researcher from Russia Yevgeny Ponasenkov about laws.