Topic: Rejoice! Actmyname is soon to be demoted - page 2. (Read 2908 times)

Meh. Nullius likes to mastubate while sucking DT dicks. How gross! Get some sunshine, boy. Or do some coding. Your Github needs some lovin.




"It's what I call "mental masturbation", when you engage is some pointless intellectual exercise that has no possible meaning." - Linus Torvalds

Once upon a time, I seduced a beauteous lady of arts and letters with a running erotic joke about commas, interspersed with intercourse on Byron.  Thence ensued a story more appropriate for /u/GirlsGoneBitcoin than here, wherein she confirmed my reputation as “mad, bad, and dangerous to know”.  Thus, I do understand why you’re jealous of my way with words; you should be.

---

And your opinion matters, because...?


Shame on you for cherry-picking a quote, and leveraging that to take a holier-than-thou attitude toward someone who has freely given extraordinary amounts of time to helping newbies, squashing predatory scammers, and fighting spam.  I don’t wonder why your reply picked on that, instead of this:


I am also unsurprised that you argued with one line out of a discussion, whilst conveniently avoiding all I said in my own far more detailed substantive response.


Yours is.  Moreover, the whole notion of “empathy” is disgusting.  It is nothing more than an emotional blank cheque demanded by the weak and incompetent on those who are not so.  It is the distilled essence of the Sklavenmoral.  But as all such things, it is a poison which acts only against those who choose to drink it.  Repudiate the concept, and it is as powerless as its preachers.


Nice boast, as a setup for an air of superiority.  But you must be new to the Internet, if you presume that others will do other than take that a grain of salt.  Maybe you’re telling the truth; maybe you’re not.  I don’t care, either way.  You will never know who I am.  In either case, publicly visible actions hold more weight than mere stories.

Now, you’ve popped up in this thread with rude pretension, unjustifiable contempt, and imperious demands unmatched by your ability to argue a point, much less enforce yours on anybody.  What it boils down to is more whining:  So, you’re “actually hating that this thread is still going”.  That’s amusing enough, but also mildly irritating.  Shoo.  If you so hate this, then I think we can agree (or at least concur) that you shouldn’t stick around here.

---

I owe others a reply upthread (including squatter’s well-thought response; fancy that, a desire for quantitative data with a sample size greater than one).  Have not forgotten.  TODO.  Meanwhile, I intend to fulfill my promises to anybody who brought popcorn.

I'm actually hating that this thread is still going. But that's my issue. I've quoted a post by a person I don't like much. This isn't secret.

I work in a position where I am responsible for looking after 20 direct reports, who in turn look after a chain of over 500 indirect reports. I rely on these people to empathise with our customers and drive promotion. If I were to adopt this frankly ridiculous position, the company I represent could never have grown.

If you are day-trading, it might be fair to say "Emotion is a weakness, etc.".

But living on a planet made up of diverse egos, wants, needs, ambitions, complaints, weaknesses and strengths, this outlook is foolish in the extreme, and is most definitely a weakness when dealing with people.

Cannot express my contempt more than that. The quotee is weak, not the person who shows empathy.

I'd rather look after my 500 people than spend my time being horrific to the people I think might one day own part of my 500 Bitcoins. Not that this person has that much. They'd have retired long ago if they did.

Disgusting attitude.

AGREED

The Forum is now safe from Evils and is on Safe Hands now.      Thank You

Here's one data point:


Mostly all from Meta or otherwise merit/forum ranking-related (i.e. meta threads in other boards). I don't see any technical threads.

Like I said, it's sort of expected that merit will be concentrated in community-oriented boards like Meta. But maybe we can be realistic about the system's limitations...

Yeah, ignoring is cool and all but then if you're having a nice day and in the mood for some light entertainment, it's too bothersome to click on the 'show' or quote the user. Might as well see what wild thing they conjure up next time.

---

I have ignored a few users but for the most part, I can do without—it's fine just mentally ignoring them, even when they have long-ass quotes.

I don't know why you guys bother. Since I've started to use the ignore button, the forum has improved immensely.

Another "mommy's expert"  
Why i don't like nerds? They pretty good at technical parts of something, but because they have very poor social experience, their conclusions about any relationship between peoples are wrong.
Of course, i could be wrong, and you're not nerd, but self-made millionare from one of the Jack's London novel. Who hard working day by day to get his money, who grew up on the street and know all about this life and people. In that case i take my words backward. Such people have right to think in such way. BUT NOT A NERDS! 


Yeah, but you're just theorist and i'm practitioner (i could be wrong as i said before). For example, post-USSR prisons. Our (i mean Ukraine, russia and other former republics) society don't have any "empathy" for criminals. If you got into the prison once, your life ruined at all. And what happens after prisoner go free? Yeah, he makes another crime and go to jail again (mostly). Because we don't have mechanism to rehabilitate such kind of people.
Yeah, maybe it doesn't have any associated with empathy, but sounds cool and pathos  


Also, Renaissance was one of the most darker part in human history. Occultism, great wars, unsanitary conditions, Witch Hunt, Black Plague. We just modernized meaning of "humanism"  

The last couple of pages in this thread have been a pleasure to read.. slightly off topic I know, but you can easily understand why users like Vod, Actmyname, nullius and Lauda all are given merit and why the merit system was introduced.

The pajeets really have turned this forum into cancer, once the farmers and spam posting fucks leave this place the forum will become a much better place to socialize. Nullius is a relatively new user but provides some great value here, people like them deserve the right to earn from signature campaigns.

anyway op you are a prized cunt, Actmyname is a pimp and I would support them sending you a shit envelope to your house every day for a month..

I agree - I don't merit posts that don't quote properly.  We don't need to read through 15 quotes and sub quotes to get to an answer, whether it is a one line shitpost or the best answer in the world.  

Please edit your quotes!  

Why quote the whole post and make a reply that is not even 10% the size of the quote block?
It's useless, unnecessary, wastes time, and is redundant. see what i did there? it's called a joke
And the random bolded n's are pointless. You didn't even bold the "not" in your second sentence so there's that inconsistency.

---

I quite like the size of nullius's replies. It makes me happy to see coherency across a large chunk of text that can flow twenty times better than the dialogue by account farmers and spammers.

Interesting point.... I had to look up the definition:


While the second (underlined) part of the quote may hold true and may be the reason, Theymos - the owner of the community, has given us authority (the bold part) by commissioning default trust. 

Doesn't that technically add up to 48.1% received in Meta? User stats are also disabled, so it's not clear what proportion of your posts are in Development & Technical Discussion vs. Meta. One individual anecdote also doesn't really disprove his claim that merit is concentrated in Meta and in limited social groups. From my observation, I'm guessing he's right about that, but I don't have any forum-wide statistics to point to. Has anyone scraped stats to look at the actual distribution among sub-forums?

As another anecdote: In my case, I never post in Meta. One post I made in Meta two days ago netted one third of my current merit, though it represented only ~3% of my posts since the system was added. I've definitely gotten the feeling that if you want a higher merit rating, you should 1) make a high quality but preferably an agreeable post and 2) do it in Meta. When I say agreeable I mean with regard to community sentiment. If your post is thoughtful but contrarian, it seems less likely to receive merit.


That may have been the stated intent. But is it generally true? Some meritorious posts earn merit. We can agree on that. Certainly, not all meritorious posts are even noticed, let alone merited. You have to wade through a lot of shitposting in e.g. Bitcoin Discussion to find quality posts, and regarding sMerit, I suspect that's not where peoples' energy is going.

It's natural for merit to be concentrated in Meta, too. "About the forum" sections tend to be the most community-oriented boards out there. And at its core, merit seems to function like a social media "like" button. I don't see how you can stop people from meriting posts they like or agree with, just as they do with "like" buttons. But something you find agreeable =/= quality or noteworthy or deserving of merit. Not by definition, and not by the stated intent of the system.

I'm not too concerned either way, but I think it's a tad dishonest for us to act like post quality is the only determining factor -- or even the most dominant factor -- in deciding merit. It's just not logical. There are social/psychological dynamics that are going unconsidered.

Not true.  I will use myself as a handy counterexample.

Counting with a 1-based index unlike a C programmer, I am currently #7 on the list of all-time top-merited users.  My rank is currently “Member”; I already have sufficient merit to skip up two ranks to “Sr. Member”.  Whereas the soonest I can reach the activity threshold for “Sr. Member” status will be on 17 July 2018 at 20:40:00 UTC.

Following is the breakdown of where I’ve earned my merit thus far.  The largest proportion has come from Development & Technical Discussion, where I am proud to have recently become the first (and thus far, only) person yet awarded merit by Core developer gmaxwell.  Here in Meta and elsewhere, I’ve also been trying to contribute to the efforts of DT members who are protecting the integrity of the merit system; but in the ordinary course of discussion, I haven’t been awarded as much merit for that as for my tech posts.


(Percentages do not always add up to 100.0% due to rounding.)

So much for your absurd theories.  The merit system is very simple:  Meritorious posts earn merit.  For example, one of my highest-merited posts, “Bitcoin’s Public-Key Security Level”, is currently +18 (including +5 from the tech forum moderator).  Make good posts, and you will earn merit—or don’t, and you won’t.

---

I gave +1 for the rest of your post, plus +1 for that alone.

---

You have it backwards, upside-down, and inside-out (as most people who make armchair historical arguments usually do).  Society collapsed (past tense) in large part from a surfeit of “empathy”.  “Society/family/clan” worked by honour and the sword, hierarchy, obedience, group loyalty, and merciless shaming and shunning of social traitors and misfits.  Not by bleeding hearts and sob stories.  The world today is drowning in empathy.  The meek are inheriting the Earth; and of course, they will wail and gnash their teeth over a merit system which stops them from inheriting the Bitcoin Forum, too.

---

There, you are wrong; for tradition stands falsely accused of an “empathy” which it never had.  This thing called “empathy” by our contemporaries who use it as a religious byword implies empathy for the weak, stupid, diseased, degenerate, cowardly, incompetent, and outright criminal.  I have never heard anyone cry that we must have “empathy” for superior achievements.  Think about it rationally:  “Empathy” is inimical to survival.  Any species with too much of it will prove to be an evolutionary dead-end.

Nature never had any “empathy”—or for that matter, mercy.  Neither does Bitcoin, whose first commandment is to keep safe your private keys:  If you lose your private keys, then you lose all.  If you fail to secure your private keys, then Bitcoin will reward a thief and punish you.  You may cry, scream, shake your fist, preach about “empathy”—it will not help, and nobody can help you.  The judgment of Bitcoin is cold, merciless, exacting, mathematically precise—and final, without any court of appeal.  It is the judgment of pure cause and effect, a financial law which echoes both physical law and the moral laws of older forms of Hinduism.  And as such, Bitcoin excludes the vagaries of human arbiters, human emotions—human corruption.  For those who are willing to take ultimate responsibility for themselves in exchange for ultimate power over themselves, Bitcoin grants freedom.  For the rest—well, I am surprised to hear people whining about “empathy” in the Bitcoin Forum.


Being a reasonable person with decent premises, you miss the contrary unstated premises of the “empathy” brigades.  The purpose of the “empathy” religion is not to induce people to help others, or achieve any other constructive goal whatsoever.  Rather, “empathy” is designed to create an inverted moral hierarchy with pitiable wretches at the top, and you at the bottom.  Its ultimate end is to destroy the very concept of superiority of achievement, and thus stop all achievement.  The architects of the general class of philosophies which converge as antecedents to today’s “empathy” were and are motivated by one or more of hatred for all mankind, blind jealousy, idealization of primitive hunter-gatherer societies and “noble savages”, and/or psychotic delusions (e.g. Auguste Comte; I categorize Rousseau similarly, on grounds that he frankly admitted being unable to cope with reality).

Please go on actually helping people, for whatever non-empathetic reasons you may have.

---

When I was young, I was given the advice that the hardest part of being a boss is firing people.  When you call some incompetent fool on the carpet and his eyes get all wide, and you think a grown man might start to cry as he begins to stammer about his kids and his wife and how much he needs this job, then you yourself are being tested for whether or not you be boss material.

If you give a damn for his sob story, then you are cruel:  Cruel to all the competent workers who also have wives and kids and families, and are breaking their backs carrying the incompetent fool as worse than deadweight.  I myself “empathize” with competence.  If you have a heart, then you must realize that firing the fool makes the workplace more efficient so that you can give everybody else a raise in wages.

Whereas here on the forum, the spammers are killing the goose which lays the golden eggs for them.  Let them rot with their own myopia.  I don’t care if they are (or claim to be) poor, have kids, or whatever—whatever.  “Please, sir, I really really really need to spam” is not an argument which moves me.  Substitute any other crime for “spam”, and the same applies.

(Aside:  I myself have real-life experience with desperation brought by ill circumstance, hardship, hunger, ailing health, and outright homelessness.  I would win any game of one-downsmanship before a jury of bleeding hearts.  I dislike mentioning that, and shan’t discuss it further, because I have something called dignity; and it does not give me any special credibility in this argument, as if only those who have had it tough can pass judgment on wrongdoing.  I bring this up only to point out that in my experience, those who have had easy lives seem most susceptible to catching “empathy”.  I infer from that a misplaced sense of guilt.  Whereas those who face genuine life-and-death hardship either become degenerate beggars, or embrace the lesson that the strong survive and the weak perish.  “Builds character.”)

---

Well, here’s a “Legendary” who is unable to distinguish between a user who contributes to the forum and has a sig ad, versus a user who comes here only to spam the forum to make money off sig ads.  F in logic.

---

No, not really.  Also, please look up the word “humanism”.  It is one of the words most abused by pseudointellectuals who have no idea what they’re talking about.  I myself would claim (or at least aspire) to be a “humanist”, in the Renaissance sense.  I totally reject the concept of “empathy”.

---

You almost hit the nail on the head.  See what I said above about “group loyalty”.  The only part you missed is that to “empathy” advocates, this isn’t a bug:  It’s a feature.  So-called “empathy” is nothing more than a toxic social solvent which forces people to not only embrace the lowest common denominator, but expand it beyond your own village’s idiots to include every poor wretch in the whole wide world.

---

Drop the “lot of you” false equivalencies, or else I will stomp my feet and hold my breath until I turn blue.

Yeah, lol. If the red button with "brutally kill everyone in Austria to get 100 k $" will appear about me, i must push it, because it would be very rationally.

Nah, you're wrong again. Most maniacs doesn't kill the people they know. Their victims are mostly strangers. (you can read about that fact in the Ted Bandy link above). Empathy it's not about family or friends. It's about people who you don't know.

Also, mostly, there two types of people who thinking in such way (I about Lauda's speech):
- killers, drug dillers and other criminals or very specific people. (believe to me, i live in Ukraine, a country at war. Here enough such kind of people). They mostly live according to the principles of cynicism, nihilism, rationalism.
- "Mommy's experts". You know what doest it means. No comments  

I think you've got it wrong. Why would you care for someone that doesn't affect you at all? You can't compare empathy in earlier years and now. Communities were smaller and you kind of got to know and benefit from one another.

Sad but true. World is moving hell of a lot faster than it did before.

Also, psychopaths absolutely lack sense of regret, remorse and empathy. That doesn't mean you should abandon all of that for you family, friends,etc... People you care about.

Now on the topic about Actmyname... if you did nothing wrong and think you're falsely flagged, there must be a reason for that either a correct one or some misunderstanding. Don't make a mistake, like I did, and go around the forum screaming and crying about your negative trust, because it's not going to help.
If you know you're falsely flagged, make a topic and explain your situation. Eventually, if you're truly falsely given neg trust, it'll be removed.

I don't think that he should be demoted, because he's actually fair about it and will remove the trust if it's unjust. I'd rather give out yellow flag like a warning before anything.



I'd also love to give my answer to this quote considering Actmyname. That may be BUT if that person truly is falsely given neg trust and has given a rational explanation on why is it unjust, then I do believe that that neg trust will be removed. So even if you get neg trust, you'll have it removed soon enough if you're clean. I don't know about that "racist elitist" thing, never encountered it. Cheers!







(not pointing at anyone, just speaking as it is from personal experience)

You're wrong, lol. Empathy it's one of the most important principles of humanism. I very doubt that you would change your residence in humanistic country (as i know - Austria) for USSR or Third Reich   yeah, it was two empires which were built on principles of rationalism.
Also, there existed many "good" organisations with members without empathy. NKVD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD) or Schutzstaffel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schutzstaffel)  


People without (i mean they don't have such trait) empathy it's mostly maniacs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy for example. The man who didn't fill any empathy for his victims and any guilt. Quote from wikipedia:  
BUT! I agree with you that we can't have empathy for criminals.  

My opinion: actmyname is very honest with his feedbacks. Merit traders and other criminals will butthurt anyway, 'cause they don't have empathy 

I hdn't really encountered Actmyname until all these threads started to appear. I've read several of them, and I'm starting to like the guy. He may be a bit different, and have his own opinions, but that is a great personal trait in my opinion.

So - Keep acting your name, whatever your name is.

Basically OP has an alt account which get tagged by actmyname and now rejoicing that actmyname will be removed what a coward way OP.
Now I believe that being a butthurt will always be a butthurt. Show your true identity and let's see if you can still rejoice. It doesn't matter if he will be removed or not unless you pay for them or you can't work your ass if they have them.