Topic: nutildah got red trust recent hours. Is the red trust fairly for him? - page 3. (Read 1520 times)

He specifically referenced feedback you have left for the DASH dev (which it appears has been deleted since, I am not sure I don't see it) as well as your posts about Monero. Also you again have left negative ratings for others simply for promoting projects that you feel are not legitimate. If those ratings are valid for you to leave I see no reason why his rating left for you should not be valid. Your ratings have just as much to do with "financial transactions" as yours seeing as you provided zero evidence to support your claims.

Usually I might be inclined to discuss this rating with him, but you seem intent on insisting you have a right to leave ratings like this for others while claiming ratings motivated by the exact same type of activity are invalid when left for you. I am willing to reconsider actions to resolve this if you are willing to start observing a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws when leaving negative ratings. Until then all I see is a hypocrite crying that they got a tiny taste of what they dish out to others freely without evidence.

No this is evan duffield this is a captive instamine ( a premine).

@cryptohunter


Is it our Evan from Quark who created over 10 coins with instamine on that forum ?

His comment referenced me posting a news story about Monero. Has nothing to do with Dash. The Dash part of his comment has nothing to do with finance. It stemmed from when I asked him what was up with his multi-year obsession with trolling Dash. If you want to argue that does have to do with finance, OK fine, but as far as them actually being a fraud is concerned, that point is not well evidenced by iCEBREAKER. As I said previously I don't even hold Dash anymore, I was just intrigued when I saw iCEBREAKER had returned to continue his epic trolling saga.

After seeing my comment, he dug up and commented on several old threads of mine, looking for a reason to red tag me I suppose.


The difference is he left his rating for me spreading what he considered to be "fake news." Has nothing to do with finance or transactions. My ratings all implicate the user of having financially-related motivations and being involved in what is potentially a scam, and they are backed by evidence displayed in the referenced link.

Do you believe "being critical of some one" is a good reason to leave a negative trust? If the answer is "no," then you should remove iCEBREAKER from your inclusions.

You can add ";dt" to the end of any page (thread, profile, trust page, etc.) to see it as if you were using Default Trust at depth 2 (the default settings). Also, if you want that view all the time, DarkStar_ has created a Tampermonkey script here which will do that for you. That way you can see everything as if it were default trust, whilst maintaining your own customized trust list.

Also I had set depth#1, buy problem is all DT2 feedback's hide to me from original DT list. That means I will not able to see DT2 feedback's from original DT list. That's why I again return it depth#2. If select depth 1 then I become more confuse because I can't see DT2 feedback's.

Because you have your depth set to 2, you will see many feedbacks that you don't necessarily agree with. The default depth of 2 works if you are using Default Trust, as "Default Trust" as a concept is level 0, DT1 members are level 1, and the people they trust become level 2. If you set up your own customized trust list, the people you choose become level 0, the people they trust become level 1, and the people they (the level 1s) trust become level 2, so you effectively end up with an extra layer of trust that you don't necessarily want.

For you iCEBREAKER will be level 1, as he is trusted by Lauda, who you have included in your level 0. shasan will be level 2 for you, as he is trusted by nutildah who is level 1 for you because he is in turn trusted by yogg, tmfp, Slow death, and xtraelv, who are all on your trust list (level 0).

Most people with a custom trust list generally set their depth to 1 rather than 2.

Confused, why nutildah's rating -1: -1 / +1 showing to me Seems iCEBREAKER & shasan's feedback's visible to me by default. I think due to I have selected dept#2. Especially shasan feedback's make me always confused, because he had sent lot of positive feedback's who took loan from him even they are newbie account. I really don't think its necessary, even sent 3 feedback's to nutildah. Is it necessary? I think a lender could leave positive feedback's if he was on risk. However everyone have freedom to leave feedback but I don't like to see this kind of feedback's. Sorry for that but I have to exclude iCEBREAKER & shasan since they aren't on DT but feedback's is annoying me especially when I see a newbie green trusted by shasan. I don't know who is from my trust list added them, also I can't force anyone to remove from their trust list. But if they removed I will also remove my exclusion. I have no problem with both of them except visibility of trust rating.

[waves magic wand and starts discussion again]

Ok, so it seems to me his comment was in fact directly involving finance. If I say I really like XYZ gambling site, and they are actually a fraud and you redtag me for it, are you not negative rating me for what I said?

Lets look at a few examples from your own ratings:


"bataklik   2019-02-23   0.00000000   Reference   Promoter of scam project that is pretending to be a successful project. Please see here for scam accusation thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scam-s4feworld-client-contains-ransomwareadware-5110191 . This user's account has likely been hacked and is untrustworthy. "

"BrieMiller   2019-02-22   0.00000000   Reference   Promotion of HYIP products, part of a bumping service that bumps threads with low-value posts. Not genuinely concerned with the outcome of projects. Do not trust this user or take any of their questions seriously. "

"cryptobenn   2018-12-02   0.00000000   Reference   Promoting the ETH token scam "FREE Coin" "


There are more but I would rather not be here all day. I am not even saying your ratings shouldn't have been left, maybe they should, but that is irrelevant.

It seems to me iCEBREAKER's rating for you is functionally indistinguishable from these ratings you have left for others as defined by your own terms of what makes it invalid. Being critical of some one is not trolling just because you are having trouble dealing with it. I also like the nice touch of you calling me a hypocrite in a classic Alinski style refractory tactic to re-frame this about me when the post is literally about you and your received rating. I think everyone can see what is happening here, yes. Have nice day.

Because trust should be reserved for matters directly involving finance: the exchange of goods and services for crypto or money. It shouldn't be used because somebody said something that you disagree with.

But I already know any answer I give you will not suffice. I should have stuck to ignoring you; you're clearly trolling me at this point. I think everybody else can see what is going on here. This is what you do, you talk in circles until your "opponent" gets bored and moves on, and then you can declare victory.

It would be in your own best interest and reflect your own endlessly-explained belief system if you removed iCEBREAKER from your trust list. Not doing so is clearly hypocritical on your part. Have a terrific day.

/end of discussion

Really, you haven't. The post you claim answers my question is a purposely overly inclusive list of other people's opinions, then your version of the narrative. You have not once in your own words told me why you think iCEBREAKER's rating for you is invalid. If any one is curious, nutilda refuses to answer this question because they know I might later hold them to those same standards that they themselves held to others. Nutilda can't have that now can they?

Some words of truth at last (by lauda not nutildah)

Nice to watch Lauda give the underlings a bit of bitch slap now and then if they step out of line. POW haha

Nutildah is observably lying again. It is not subjective. It's a proven scam.

A scam is "deliberate deception often to ensure unfair gain" ... you know what a deception is right?

Well, to give you an example: saying there will be a fair launch and no premine. Then going ahead and captive instamining (same as a premine for all intense purposes) then deciding to chop away the remaining 75% of the minting to magnify the huge captive instamine. Then creating a mechanism where those that held all the loot took more from any remaining miners and made the decisions too.  If this is not a scam then there are no scams here.  

You and others are simply telling blatant lies to profit and protect it. Actually the most honourable person was Evan who freaked out at all of the pressure that I and others that joined in  applied to him (whilst fighting their protectors like some in this thread) to offer the 2 Billion dollar air drop that the board was too sloppy to even claim at the time. I wonder how many of you were on that vote to prevent the airdrop going through? Would be VERY interesting to see that poll made transparent in the future for historical purposes.

I was less hostile to the project after this because  he did offer to do the right thing but was pressured by others to drop it. I think the project later on became more important than just the money to him.

I don't care about any of that now since capped ico's are essentially monster instamines  which ensure super narrow distributions. They like it like that so they  can collude and drive up market caps and dump it to suckers for hugely inflated prices (most are worthless)  before creating the next great white paper dreams and talk bunch of fantasies for investors to get duped into investing in.

Your only hope was to retain persons like AM who analysed a lot of white papers and debunked their dreams and nonsense or pointed out occasional interesting designs. Let's face it only 0.01% or less of the board have the tech chops to know a new interesting and plausible design. The rest is all guessing and hoping.  Most don't bother even attempting it and prefer to find other ways to milk the board.  

Even then you are bound to get those blinded by greed that will risk their btc on even the most obvious scam promising huge returns only to start crying they were scammed after. You will not be able to save everyone from .... themselves. Trying to do so is actually more damaging really. Best to let evolution take its course naturally. This is like some genetic engineering experiment that caused some damaging and dangerous mutations that likely need not have ever existed.

As I have said before many times. The most damaging scams to this movement are not the 2 bit run with the btc scammers. They are the projects that sound credible, have a solid white paper (to most peoples standards of understanding) they have strong backing and support and some talent, they grab headlines. They don' just exit. They gradually dwindle and erode the dev funds and eventually seem to stop pushing updates.

Perhaps some middling drama and dev friction and founders leaving.. then the full dump and investors capitulate and let go at huge losses......time passes guess what the devs have been working secretly and diligently and some great updates " meanwhile accumulating all the cheap tokens back that they originally sold to investors for huge sums" and again it spikes back right up to where it was before and a period of enthusiasm and belief returns. Then the cycle repeats until eventually one day it does not come back and it is found on page 20 of coinmarket cap.  These are the killer scams and they are the ones that crush the spirit here more than those that cut and run straight away. They are also impossible to stop unless you have experts who tell you flat out this white paper would require likely 3 nobel prize level break throughs or is just technobabble dreamed up by some marketeers that could not con seed money from anywhere outside crypto fantasy land.

So given those are unstoppable and only the 2 bit whack a mole scammers are temp preventable let us not over estimate what the DT can do for projects that are hugely damaging scams. DT for the trading board is different and should be attended to by long term trusted traders that have dealt with vast sums over the years.

I mean this is without really factoring in the damage that DT members advertising, campaign managing, and in any other way supporting these "long game" scams can bring by seemingly guaranteeing their success/legitimacy in the minds of noobs.

Keep DT for the trading forums, and only for proven scammers. I mean if someone is a proven scammer lets fucking delete that piece of shit anyway.

Right, I mean since it wasn't against me, I guess it was more of a counter-rating. I almost put counter-rating but then edited it.

Your rating was a counter-rating not a retaliatory one, unless I mixed up something here.

I deleted my feedback on eduffield's account in the spirit of not leaving retaliatory ratings.

I'm also doing the same for gembitz and IconicExpert.

A good market is not proof of anything. Pretty much everything in top 100 is absolute and utter garbage (ETH, EOS, Tron, etc.). There's nothing to "differ". Either the tech is objectively good or it isn't, which in Dash's case it isn't.

Well, I beg to differ, as do the markets... It was the first of its kind and often imitated. Whether or not it will survive the long haul remains to be seen, as with every single other cryptocurrency, but its been in the top 20 coins by market cap for several years. I reserve the term "shitcoin" for more bland coins than this with less real-world adoption.

This is false. DASH is mostly a marketing scam with little to no actually valuable tech. Duffield knew what he was doing, there's no doubt there. Tagging him is possibly appropriate, but I never bothered to read up the thread of that shitcoin in recent times. It was a viable experiment, but now it is nothing more than a useless shitcoin.

Even if you exclude the trolls that get involved in most threads, you're touching on multiple hot subjects at the same time most notably "I know what a good coin is" beliefs.

LOL. It looks like that I started a hot topic, that might long-last over weeks or months. 
To be honest with you all, I don't really care about Trust system, because it is too complicated to me.
Of course, for someone who are famous, reliable in the forum, with or without Trustscore, they will always be well-known.
Trustscore is only make sense when I see some accounts the first time, I don't know who are they, how about their reliablity.
In such cases, Trust score makes lots of sense.

Your exact words were these:


I thoroughly complied with your request. This is entirely based on my opinion, which holds in regard the opinions of others.

Edit: BTW, thanks suchmoon, I appreciate your kind words, and your earlier guidance in matters surrounding what DT should be used for.