Topic: Poll: Acceptability of Signature Wearer's Use of Insults and Foul Language (Read 548 times)

Why are you going off topic what happened to your language Also off topic postings should not be paid IMHO by your Signature Manager

I'm really, really sorry that your forum experience did not work out as intended and we all failed to live up to your standards; clearly there are too many irresolvable issues here for your experience to be productive one, and we will all be deeply saddened by your departure.

Really Sorry that I  have to disagree.

You are actually saying that the poster can put in a paragraph of valid and on-topic text and add some insults and foul language and get paid! Sorry this is not acceptable to me at all and if a manager can or will handle it like this they are also only in it for the money and not for fair delivery for their paying client. this gives me food for another poll!

For you it only counts if there is a post of only insults, then the poster should not get paid, but if he mixes it all is fine.
Please reconsider, thanks

Campaign managers add in their campaign rules that posts must be constructive, meaning posts that are off topic are likely not to be paid, but the use of foul language would not be considered off topic in all cases; you can be constructive and chip in one or two insults or whatever, the campaign manager would definitely not mind. Prolly if the content of the post is just insults and nothing else, then i think it is fair if the manager does not pay for that particular post.

Respect is earned.  

If someone loses my respect, I reserve the right to insult them.  It's as simple as that.  I'm not here to sugar-coat anything.  I call it like I see it.  Anyone who has read my posts knows there's a sharp side to my tongue, heh.  If the campaign I'm on decided not to pay posts where I used foul language or insulted people, I'd simply get paid a bit less.  It wouldn't stop me doing it.

Bottom line:  If you don't like reading what certain people are saying, that's what the 'ignore' button is for.

Sorry, I thought we already agreed that we were only talking about signature campaigns, since the poll is only about signature campaigns.

Let me give you an example. I do not wear a signature of any campaign that will pay me sats for my posts. So I can attack and insult and will only harm myself if it is below the belt.

A member with a signature of a signature campaign who gets paid for his postings should IMO not go off topic and use any insults or foul language. even if it is not specifically in the signature rules mentioned by the manager. It should be obvious. This foul member should not be paid by the manager.
Yes, this is just my opinion and that is why I opened the poll.

Cheers

The forum supports freedom of speech; those who are too tender and cannot sleep from the insults of strangers should press the ignore button more often. Also, there are those here who always recommend putting on thick skin. For some, obscene words are poured with mother's milk; should they be blamed for it? This is a problem of upbringing, and if a person is what he is, just accept him as he is; it’s better than prevaricating, pretending to be a gentleman, and in the end, holding a knife behind his back.
There are plenty of these lies offline. It's better to be a good person who knows how to swear than a quiet, well-mannered scum.

Finally, 2 members who not only read, but understand very well what they read.

Chapeau to @PrivacyG and @Vod (haters, spare your ass licking comments, as I am not and never will be)

@Privacy
Exactly the poll is about foul language and insults in signature campaigns. We all know that there are rules in this forum and among civilized people and one of the rules is certainly not to attack members with foul language and insults. But the poll is specifically about signature campaigns and the people who carry them.

Yes, the manager of such campaigns also has a great responsibility to his client who is the paying party and as you pointed out it will damage the clients casino/company name.



This post by @Vod is one of the best I have ever read in this forum. I am many years member here and well hated by spammers and scammers like moneypot platform owners years ago. I received a lot of red trust from them because I was the first to call out their rug pull. After they did the rug pull many years ago, their red trust is still in my trust. IMHO this is not right but ok it is what it is.

Anyway, this post from @Vod gives me hope if the right people read it. Because I love bitcoin and I love this forum.

Cheers and thanks to both of you

Removal could be done automatically using the trust or merit system - you just need to decentralize both of those.     Make the DT lottery open source (is it random or based on opportunity?) and replace merit sources with a more intelligent distribution system.  Anything that is not centralized (monthly bitcoin payments to bitcoin community coin holders, or forum workers, or forum designers for examples) should be documented so Theymos cannot further treat the assets as his own.

I agree to this.

Full freedom is amazing until it goes into the wrong hands.  The only way a Decentralized Forum would work well is if there was some sort of way to remove posts through the consensus of the community.  But how do you do that without having the wrong hands multiplying their voting power to influence the consensus to their advantage.

Unfortunately we do not live an utopia so limits are necessary.  Similar to how I see Bitcoin, this Forum either imposes limits or does not at all.  If there is freedom of speech and freedom of expression, we should be allowed to say any thing any time.  But then how do you deal with Doxxing, threats et cetera.  They need to be dealt with, whether we like it or not.

Limits on foul language or insults are in my opinion very subjective and highly dependent on the situation.  I would see some body presenting foul language in the Thread about a very outrageous subject such as outrageous restrictions imposed by a Government or such.  But then you have the situation of users randomly going off topic and insulting any body and every body they do not like and presenting foul language with no reason really.  There is an option to ignore that user, or there can be a limit triggered by subjectiveness of moderators or Theymos himself.

But OP particularly mentions Signature Wearers.  If this is the case then I believe it should be the choice of the Manager whether to allow such behavior or not.  After all, they are choosing a participant through selection.  If the participant does not behave well and the Manager notices and does not like it or the promoted Service thinks it would damage their image, I presume there would be some sort of notice followed by removal from the Campaign.

Back on topic, there is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

Theymos does allow liberal use of expression, stopping at physical threats.   You can swear all you want and have any opinion you want - to a point.   If you try to post something Theymos does not want seen, he does delete it, both here and on r/bitcoin.  These sites, like any other centralized government, limits speech that could damage it.

TMAN?  Yeah, there's a guy who had the mouth of a trucker--and I often wonder where he went to.  The forum lost a lot of very colorful members in the last few years, whether they used a profuse amount of profanity or just voiced their opinions in a forceful manner.  It's unfortunate that they're not all still around, because it seems like they added just the right amount of spice to certain discussions, something that's missing right now.

And hell no, I don't want to be censored on bitcointalk.  There are so many other discussion forums where profanity is the least of what you can't write.  Here you can offend people without fear of getting banned, and the community basically regulates itself if someone steps out of line.  That's the way it ought to be IMO, instead of an admin making rules up in order to protect people's feelings and whatnot.  

Yeah, bitcointalk does have rules about what can be said, but they're so rarely enforced that they might as well not even exist.  Go Theymos!

I voted for subjective option. Same like in our daily life, sometimes there is no other way to deliver message without insulting someone that he would understand. Offcourse, it's not acceptable if you will do that too often. But I see nothing wrong to insult scammers, abusers and similar kind of idiots.
Also, sometimes even friendly banter can look like insult.
P.S. I'm not sure what kind of issue you have OP, but it goes off-topic and there is no need to use this colourfoul text.

Let's see. You have proven once again that you are just like Nutildah, a LIAR and a false accuser. You should be ashamed

^I’m not trying to derail your poll with my post above. You are the one who started it and I just merely pointed out to you how you easily agitated when an issue is about your previous action is addressed to you.

Just checking here the result of your poll until I saw again your color code post that you are using when the topic is about Blackjack.fun since you already change it back to normal when you started this thread. Not gonna cause you a buzz anymore here. Chill.

Nutildah and you derailed the Poll now. I hope other members can see it. this Poll is not personal but a legit one

please give me the valid argument? let him or you or anyone prove that I exploited Blackjack.fun for 24USDT or a part of it!
and how much I wanted to extort from Blackjack.fun

all empty accusations! and if not PROVE IT!

I answered you on your what I thought was a serious question and then I never heard back from you. did you forget?
I am sure you had your reasons for not answering. You asked me how Blackjack.fun and I can just agree and settle the case as you could not believe that the whole dilemma is 30USDT and even as a donation.

Prove me wrong and that I wanted to steal the big part of 24USDT easy as that. but you can not and even Blackjack.fun can not prove it as they have not done so far. you and all the others who are fighting me are not doing Blackjack.fun a favor in the contrary you are just hurting them more and more. That is fine with me, and I am grateful for the opportunity to shout it over and over again.


It would be so easy to end this sad comedy of yours if you or whoever and Blackjack.fun would prove your false and empty accusations because if you prove it I will have to sit on my hands/mouth and apologize.

I still think that this is a very legit Poll even some want to derail it as I opened it. I can promise to those who want to derail it that I have some more legit Polls in mind

@Jackpotracer you change temper quickly and forget about the intention of your thread despite you are the sole author. This is the reason why keep receiving foul word and insulted because you are easy to be triggered on comment that is against you. 

It only takes you 8 non color post to be back again on this same color scheme post pattern to intensify the message of your post. @Nutildah always hits you right on the spot with his valid argument.

I apologize, but I cannot let a LIAR and a member who follows me just to spread his lies go away without an answer.
I opened this poll and it is a simple and legitimate poll. Why would someone come in here to attack me and make it personal? Did I mention a member by name and attack them in this poll? NO


Why did you vote here? AM I surprised that you voted with YES? NO as you don't care as long you can show your Signature to earn some sats?
You wrote I opened this poll because I am mad at signature spammers, YES I AM and with reason and one is members like YOU


Wrong and you are a LIAR and anyone who is interested can read the scam accusation thread (link he posted) but not only to read but to be objective to understand the reason.
You also should read their thread
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63814896
and the reputation thread they opened
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63847290

Yes Blackjack.fun the reputable online casino as you call it SCAMMED me out of 24USDT LOL and they accused me that a big part of the 24USDT was won by using an exploit LOL
I found the exploit when another player used it against me. Instead of being grateful, they accused me of cheating them out of most of the 24USDT. All this without providing any evidence in the form of game logs, which would be easy for the owner/developer. BTW I never asked for a withdrawal as I wanted to help without any bounty


Blatant LIAR! Prove your Accusations!

Blackjack.fun after I opened the Scam accusation wanted to pay me the 24USDT - 30USDT and an additional 100USDT even without KYC! Guess what I did? I kindly declined it as no one can buy me! You can try me! I asked them to give the 30USDT as a donation to any Legendary member or to open a game and round riddle and give the 30USDT as a Prize for free

A member asked me as he was confused that the whole discussion was about 30USDT and an apology because of false accusation if I will stop and close the scam accusation. here you can read the conversation in Blackjack.fun gambling thread

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63819291
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63819340
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63821949
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63822407

sadly I did not get any answer from this member or Blackjack.fun which means they want to go on fighting for 30USDT the owe me and I never asked for but then I insisted they need to give it as  Donation.

Conversations can sometimes get heated and a person’s choice in language will reflect that. We cannot change human nature, therefore campaign managers should have some tolerance for foul language. As long as the person isn’t doing it just to be a troll and behaving in such a way that it becomes detrimental to the image of the business they are advertising then it should just be considered as exercising their right to free speech.

I voted Yes, Acceptable. But it comes with the caveat of being conditional and whether or not the language used is specifically harmful to the employer of the campaign.

OP is just big mad because he launched a Don Quixote-esque campaign against a rather reputable online casino for reasons not entirely clear. Everyone who dared to criticize his heavily-flawed logic and foul-attitude approach was dismissed as being a "signature shower". To my knowledge not one single forum member has taken his side on this issue.

The casino tried to compensate and pacify him in every reasonable way, but he continues to spew unfounded bullshit against them, almost like he is trying to extort money from them or something. Clearly he's not right in the head and the feedback I left for him 4 years ago still holds true today, possibly more than ever before: