Topic: Question for The Pharmacist (Read 662 times)

So I see you are going to avoid any accountability whatsoever for your emotion based choices as you accuse me of the same while you continue your passive aggressive attitude. I can't say I am surprised. I was more surprised when you temporarily grew a spine for a while there and stood up to some of the trust system abusers. I can see you have traded that in for a ticket to ride in the clown car and that is paying dividends being part of the klan. Too bad, I had some hope for you. I guess that was misguided.

You do whatever you want. You have to live with your choices and face the fact that you are making your decisions about the trust system based on your personal pet peeves rather than accurate use of the trust system. I feel I have made it pretty clear I am not going to change the way I approach these situations because of the trust system being used as a carrot or a stick to motivate me to not address issues that might upset some people or make them uncomfortable. One would think that would be valued in a system of trust, but apparently not.

No, I don't need the community's opinion about this, and frankly neither do you. This is your choice. Furthermore the results are more than predictable. There will be a parade of clowns thirsty to grasp at any opportunity to deride me. Anyone who might speak otherwise won't because either they already have, or they are afraid of being targeted as many have simply for speaking in my defense and are not willing to put their own reputations on the line for doing so.

"A history" you say. So far you have mentioned one questionable rating from 5 years ago. Is there anything else? Fuck getting "angry" (as if you can judge that via text over the internet), the question is if that is true, do I let it effect the way I use the trust system and use it reflexively in anger? I think my track record shows one of the most moderated uses of the trust system in the whole forum. I speak out for people even when I don't like them if I think they were wronged and attempt to acheive a mutually restorative solution wherever possible. When it is not possible, I don't couch my words because people willing to speak difficult truths are rare, and I refuse to make myself common for the sake of niceties.

Some times conflict is required to solve problems, and pathological aversion to conflict causes problems. Conflict is simply something I do not shy away from for the sake of convenience or to maintain a popular facade for personal gain. There is not a lot of subtext with me, what you see is what you get, and some people really don't like that and prefer to hide behind those niceties because it is what makes them most comfortable. This results in stagnation and greater long term conflict rather than simply addressing those issues directly.

Again, if your complaint is purely my tone and the fact you don't like that I some times upset people, just admit you exclude me for your own personal dislike of me and the general way I conduct myself. Don't lie and pretend it is because I abuse the trust system to satiate my own personal impulses to absolve yourself of accountability. Own up to it and I will drop it, otherwise account for your actions.

TECSHARE, I told you I'm reconsidering my position on your exclusion from my trust list; if this conversation continues with your tone of aggravation, I'm afraid my current position is only going to be reinforced--and yes, there is a personal aspect to this because of that interaction we had years ago.  That got my attention very quickly, whereas I might easily miss a thread or a feedback left for someone else.  That shouldn't be surprising.

I'd actually like to hear the community's opinion on this if it can be done in a level-headed manner--and believe me, I understand why you made this thread self-moderated and made that local rule, but I'd genuinely like to hear some feedback on whether I should keep excluding you or not. 

I'm on the fence.  I already told you the main two reasons why I've excluded you, which have to do with your judgement when leaving trust feedback (and nothing else).  I don't have a "global" distrust for you, because you have a very long track record of not screwing people over in deals or scamming anyone.  If I thought you were a scammer, I'd have left a red trust.  The problem I have with you, TECSHARE, is that your judgement often seems extremely clouded by anger, defensiveness, and a touch of paranoia--though that doesn't mean you're always wrong on some points.  And as I said before, you've got a history of this when it comes to leaving feedback. 

I think I've seen some improvement in the time I've been a member here, and I'm inclined to follow Theymos's edict that hatchets ought to be buried.  If you ask me for evidence of that, I wouldn't be able to produce it without doing some serious research; it's just a feeling that I've gotten over the course of time, sort of like my feelings toward cryptodevil. 

You've already got this thread self-modded, so might I suggest you rescind your local rule of only allowing me to post here?

So one rating about 5 years ago left over a user harassing me in my sales threads, which I offered to remove if they stopped shitting up my sales thread? Weird how you have tons of other people on your trust list with tons of clearly abusive ratings... it almost seems like I am excluded by you for personal reasons rather than my misuse of the trust system.

I didn't mean that quote as a jab to you.  Quite the contrary, it was meant to suggest that I might change my mind about your status on my trust list (if that matters to you at all, which it probably doesn't). 

I don't want to get into a battle with you about my exclusion of you from my trust list, because I'm well aware that such a discussion could go on forever with no progress ever being made.  Instead, the two main factors that have influenced me are 1) The reason you got booted from DT a number of years back, which was for abusing the trust system (and I don't have a link to the thread where that was decided, but I do remember reading it), and 2) Our first "fight" which was basically just a disagreement over something, which led to you PMing me multiple times until I blocked you, and after which you wrote a fairly aggressive comment as a neutral trust on my trust page--which you apparently deleted, because I tried to find it just now and couldn't. 

Props to you for doing that.

So what ratings that I have left in the past do you find objectionable exactly? People looking for any excuse to demonize me often talk about this mythical trust abuse I supposedly perpetrated, but never seem to be able to quantify or quote anything. So tell me, what exactly is your judgement of me based upon?

In before the "why didn't you just PM" comments. He addressed me off topic in public, sliding in a "by the way" type jab in a passive aggressive way like he usually does, and I want a reply in public.

Local rule: Only "The Pharmacist" may post.