Topic: Q: Should Lauda *really* be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no - page 17. (Read 43401 times)

I think pretty much everyone involved is aware of that right now.

I'm also BCX endorsed?  

Leaving negative rating due to unjustified retaliatory feedback is highly immoral indeed. Stop flogging a dead horse.

Leaving trust to the people that I've traded with during 2016 is very shady indeed. I should also state that I consider users that breath air after they are born shady.

---

The ratings have been removed (at the moment) in case that anyone is wondering.

I am not sure how you draw the conclusion that I am endorsing lauda.

What Lauda did is highly immoral, and shows that he should absolutely not be in any kind of position of trust.  

It also appears that Lauda is attempting to farm trust from a number of people she has traded with in the past (or so he claims), as he has both sent and received multiple trust ratings since I have left him negative trust. This alone is shady in it's own regard.

So Lauda does what he says.

Sounds like great Global Mod material to me.

Lauda is QS endorsed!


~BCX~

That would be cool.

Maybe Quickseller can go ahead and lock this thread, at least temporarily, while these guys cool off and discuss privately.

Damn, I missed a lot in this thread. I'm not willing to get involved either, but I will say that defcon23 has been a competent person to deal with. I'm actually waiting on a couple of things from him, but I have no doubt they'll arrive shortly. Anyway glad to see that some peace has been reached.

Awesome!  48 hrs cool off then.  If you could, plz ignore any posts from others too, who may try taunting or egging you on to continue responding back and forth.  I'll PM both of you soon as well.

Thanks!!

Nope. Your claims against me are false and thus deserve negative rating.

Bullshit. Stop talking about cryptocurrency-coins when you have no knowledge regarding them and you aren't involved in that scene. I successfully bought three #1's at the prices previously listed. The average price was under $25, thus the offer was valid. I highly doubt that anyone (any collector) thought the coin would be worth 0.25/0.3 at the time.

Don't push your comprehension issues towards me. And stop with the "discount bullshit" there was no previous sale of any #1 that had reached a price higher than $25.

Nope. There was talk about a meetup and the logs prove it.

False. The coin was not sold at the time of the negative rating. The coin was on an auction, ergo "on sale".

There was no extortion or any wrongdoing from my side. The feedback has nothing to do with the genesis coin and very little to do with the bogus escrow situation. I have never and will never treat someone unfairly as far as moderation is concerned. You can't seriously expect a person to be impartial about every single thing in their life.

Every single thread about me resulted in:"Shouldn't be mod. because X". I have no idea what I did. Here goes QS with his biased opinions even though defcon23 and myself have made some peace for starters.


Correct. I have fun with people occasionally.

Nope. I have not stated I'd give him negative rating, nor have I given him the negative rating for such.

Sure, I'm fine with that.

Good! Lauda, would you give me a chance too plz?

this make sense .. ( good sense.) .. i  just hate war ...    
so,  i'm OK.. :  Peace process ..
 this pocess seem having already started , by the way..

That part seems sketchy to me.  But apparently the negative feedback was actually related to some previous incident with defcon23?  I said above that it seems like bad judgment to me.

You failed to mention that as part of that "fucking around" that Lauda said she would leave negative trust if defcon23 sold the coin to someone else, and thrn subsequently left negative trust when defcon23 sold the coin to someone else.

From what I can tell, Lauda offered defcon a low price for a physical coin in an IRC.  Defcon refused to sell.  Lauda fucked around with him in the chatroom.  That's what I've been able to gather so far.

Would both of you give me a chance to mediate with you both please?

First, both remove negative feedback for each other, then abstain from further comments for 48 hrs.

Let's cool off and I'd be happy to mediate between both after cool off period.

Deal?

As someone who whines so much about unjustified feedback you might want to take a look in the mirror (and your sent feedback). Someone who happens to disagree with you gets labelled as "sherif" [sp] and "alt of Neotox". Perhaps you should consider another approach, such as not using the trust system to settle your pillow fights. You seem to have a good trade going on but being an utter asshole is getting in the way.

Now back on topic - can someone give me a tl;dr of what Lauda did to piss off the quickpuppets?

I don't think you understand what extortion means. You should probably look it up. There is no reason why your ability to bid on his auction is worth anything and it is within anyone's right to decline to do business with anyone else for any reason or no reason at all.

I think you should clarify your age. I don't think you are mature enough to act impartiality.

Lol, I think it is pretty clear that your feedback is retaliatory and the purpose of which is to try to get me to prevent me from further saying that you tried (and failed to) extort a coin fromFalse. Don't make assumptions when you have no knowledge on this matter. I offered $25 which is more than the average of the last three sales ($20, $25 & $25). He said he's going to keep, so I left it at that and had a little fun with him in that chatroom (easily indentified by saying I'd leave miffman negative rating).