Topic: Re: BitcoinGirl.Club: How a condescending attitude equates to trust exclusion - page 2. (Read 1349 times)

I wouldn't wanna make this look too intrusive but, Bitcoingirl's attitude changed after the major hack recovery. Not in a bad way, but it seems like she became a bit rigorous... ain't gonna lie, sometimes I feel it's not the same person; mind you, you don't have to listen/believe me but that's just my thought.
I do alot of reading   which, is why I know basically all the sagas from the old times.

Edit: Aside the fact that you were a little bit dramatic during the whole mixer ban controversy, I haven't had any direct dealings with you and I don't have to hate you for whatever reasons others are..
Just like I said earlier, I had to dig deep into your history to have a better understanding of who you truly was.

I can't speak for the other participants, but in the PM I got from icopress, there was no talk about you in it.

Really? really an overreaction. But actually that's normal, because logically it's better to support icopress because they get campaigns from him.

@BitCoingirl.Club

Wouldn't come here if you did not tag me. I excluded you from my trust list because I don't consider you the same person I had dealings with in the past.

While you were still Pamoldar, you were one of the better posters in gambling and I enjoyed banter with you. I don't know if your account changed hands or if just real life changed both of us in a some way. But I don't feel like I am dealing with same person. I am not the one who likes to do research about stuff like that so my personal feelings along with some of your comments and recent trust ratings were enough for me to exclude you from my trust list. Recent events were trigger but not the cause of my action.

Shouldn't trust lists also be personal? This way it just leads to unnecessary drama. I am sure that was discussed in meta but I don't visit that part of the forum often. Also did not read anything but your last post here so I am sorry if I missed the point on something.

The neutral was not given to him but to icopress.

Has anyone noticed a neutral was also given to Jay Johanson too or no one directed there yet? No one is interested^[1]?

It was a blow for me. I was also surprised and felt something was not right, somewhere there is a synchronization.

Not all of those who excluded^[2] me were from the Jambler campaign [cygan, NeuroticFish, TryNinja, BlackHatCoiner], there were some from other campaigns [managed by icopress. Members are 1miau, paid2], someone who was impressed by icopress's work [apogio, a former merit cycling club youngest member], Timelord2067, jayce, Trofo and Hhampuz.

Hhampuz was odd. Last year, just before the Champions league to start I and him had massive argument about the main sponsor which he concluded with a neutral feedback and I concluded with not to join CL pool. The exclusion did not happen at that time but something thoughtful happened and he decided to exclude now with all these users. It's totally an odd timing.

It would be wrong not to think that all of these members were informed secretly [snitching, misguiding, using the poor relationship as Hhampuz-me] at the same day or week. Perhaps we have many other members who were informed secretly but not everyone thought it's right to response or decided to response later.

Not really, I don't spend the whole day on bitcointalk LOL. It was about shutting down my computer and went back to my real life.

^[1]LoyceV finally noticed LOL
^[2]Please don't think me wrong. I am not pissed [as dkbit98 thought I was, which was wrong again] by the actions from any of you except icopress. If there is a connection between all these then I am right to suspect icopress is the man who encouraged everyone to look at the feedback I left to him, created the essence to believe I am the culprit for Jambler's ban then suggested/applied a technique to manipulate the minds. Could I be wrong or you think icopress have someone to do the dirty job for him so that you never can imagine his involvement? I would like a precise answer from you.

There are some members who are diverting [perhaps it's not their intention] the essence of the thread. We know from experience that things end with nothing in these type of threads. So my responses will be limited but I will read your information with huge interest.

A note was taken. Thank you.

/*edited*/

It seems to me that by opening this thread and expressing his guesses about the trust change request, the OP may get even more tildes into his trust. Your demeanor of always going against the wind often shows the wrong side of you and not the person that you OP may not be. Nevertheless, an opinion is emerging. An attempt to prove what others supposedly do not see, taking a position above everyone else, speaks of youth, and adolescence, although yes, I know that you point out to everyone your registration date. But not everyone grows up when they become adults.
Why not resolve this issue initially in a PM, so as not to cause so much controversy from others?
But you won, what upsets you?

Yes, you always had bad taste in arguing. Can you explain how neutral tags become negative tags? A ridiculous statement made by a member with 7000 merits.

I think everyone already knows about my case, do I need to bump thread nutildah for you?


Look at your comments, just useless nonsense. If komisariatku had not told me not to comment there, I would have argued with you for your faulty logic.

Ignoring the unproven PM statement, I don't see what's wrong with asking users to change their Trust list. I've argued to exclude someone on several occasions, and if the arguments are convincing, that can work. As far as I know, the DefaultTrust system is supposed to work like this:

That being said, I was surprised by the number of Trust exclusions in a single week. I'm also surprised this caused so much drama: theymos made a decision, if you don't like that decision, blame theymos. But it's not going to change anything. I was also surprised by the neutral tags left by BitcoinGirl.Club, but since it's neutral, it shouldn't be a big deal. The wording is such that I can't take it seriously: "Scamming the idea of".... Wait what?! Followed by: "caused Jambler a reputational damage".... Wait a minute? Which one is it? The first one was scamming an idea, but the "idea scammer" got reputation damage and somehow that's a problem? Which one is it?

Nullum crimen sine lege.

Are you saying you'll leave Bitcointalk because someone was mean to you?

Please ignore this troll, this is textbook example of when to use magical ignore button in forum.
It is so stupid to assume that I am angry about anything for simply answering lies from other members (that also involved me).
I am not going to waste my time debating or answering anything with cheating liars, but everyone else can find more information about him in link below:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/pytagoraz-komisariatku-are-alts-5489102

No, it's not about neg tag. But for your overreaction to the neutral tag you got.

Jollygood? Yes, he DT is the most abuse and has used unhealthy methods to destroy someone's reputation and it is inappropriate for such methods to be used. Someone needs to fight, if you don't dare, it's no problem. I am here and will fight to the death

I also don't drag you in drama, I respect you with the ninjastics you have, you are a member who contributes a lot to the forum

I’m not following you. Which negative tag was given to me?

I think I made myself very clear and you are trying to pull me into more unnecessary drama (your signature and personal text tells me you are/have turned into a drama-based member), which I’m not really interested… good luck.

Icopress got a neutral tag but you're the one who's angry? Come on, is this how you can continue to use in Icopress campaigns? Impressive way

Since when did the neutral tag become negative? Come on, you are a member of 7000 merits, don't be silly just to defend other people. @loyceV, I think you have explained the thread of trust systems very clearly, Looks like there are members who need to read it again


As a DT, replying because of a netral tag given to you is ridiculous, almost like abuse. So the DT power you have is only used for personal gain.

I'm surprised a member like you went that far because you defended icopress, maybe because he always includes you in his campaigns. I respected you before and did not expect you to do such a reckless thing

I didn't? It wasn't me.

Then why are you listing all the members who don't trust your judgment anymore, any why deceive people that icopress ordered everyone to do this?
That ''neutral'' post you wrote to him was actually negative in reality, as you directly blamed him that he mismanaged jambler campaign
It appears that you used special cover technique in your feedback written to him just to avoid critique from other members.
For someone who allegedly wanted more transparency and ''justice'' this was not so transparent.

If I had my trust list active again, just for this sentence I would not trust you anymore:

@Charles-Tim, @Charles-Tim I logged off earlier and have no plan to login again but after seeing the bold fonts from both of you I had to come back because I see where I went wrong so it needs to be cleared before it confuse people more. I realized I picked the wording which made wrong essence. I should have explained it better. The post is edited now [rephrased the whole line]. However, for the clear essence, the attached footnote was a good indicator where it said I was working hard past few days [...]

To avoid the confusion, icopress specifically did not ask anyone [at least in public, perhaps not even in PM he would dare] to distrust [~BitcoinGirl.Club] me. His whole attempt was to show everyone that I am the culprit and everyone is at a loss because of me.

I am not pissed with everyone but icopress. I am trying to understand what causes the massive blow? [1.] icopress influenced everyone [2.] two of my posts that caused all these blow [3.] the neutral feedbacks that I left for icopress and Jambler.

That is a lie and/or false assumption mixed with some paranoia.
Icopress never told me to distrust you or anyone else, and I am not some blind follower to do whatever someone else tells me to do.
You are obviously pissed that so many people distrusting you now, but nobody trusts snitches with their judgement even if they are speaking the truth, and this was not the case here  

You also got another member who now trusts you for ''good'' job:  
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/pytagoraz-3559721

You did not understand me at all. This is not about where people earn money from or not. This is also not anymore about a mixer should be banned or not. It is about this:



Icopress sent PM but it was about Hugewin campaign. He told me to put on the signature and avatar and nothing more. And also there is no where that icopress posted that we should distrust BitcoinGirl.Club. Which means he is only telling lies, alleging that icopress did something like that but which is not true.

It looks like icopress supporters are starting to arrive. So you blame bitcoingrils for banning jambler? Where do you and several members get their income from? even though it violates the forum rules?

So what trust should we give you? ignoring forum rules about mixers for personal gain. That should deserve a neutral or negative trust.

---

---

If drug trafficking is prohibited, who will receive the harshest punishment in court, are the drug dealers or drug factory owners? Jambler is a mixer factory 

I think I have missed a lot. Where did icopress openly told people to distrust you? Or you openly but indirectly told people to distrust you.

I was in Jambler campaign and icopress did not tell me to do anything. I do not believe icopress can even do anything like that. Because some users in Jambler distrust you, do not think icopress send them PM to distrust you. Some people do not think Jambler is a mixer and that you intentionally looked for ways to bring it down and you have succeeded in what could have been helpful for some members on this forum. It is like you alleged that icopress did something, but if it comes out that it is not true, what trust should we give you? That should deserve a neutral or negative trust.

It seems like you were so angry about getting a neutral tag that you went that far. Let's toast and Please, keep talking...