Topic: removed (Read 533 times)

The first and foremost way to get rid of such problems is to respect the community and accept its rules. The second way should be considered getting rid of your own greed. What can you call someone who has multiple accounts in their arsenal? And they were created only for cheating bounty. You can think of thousands of excuses for the fact that bounty hunters do not get anything in bounty companies or, in extreme cases, they will earn a penny. But, after all, no one forces them to participate there. Therefore, you have to pay for your mistakes. Or to respect the created rules and in this case, no one will give you red trust.

Your story is different from @tumis, there is no tolerance and rebuttal for you, you really deserve it.

And you have indeed violated the rules that have been implemented by the Bounty manager.

ANN: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bountyno-kyc-dia-distribution-finished-5260771

While @tumis the red trust given by: @Wapinter, is different.
@tumis claims the token was not given by the campaign manager, namely: @Wapinter, while @Wapinter said @tumis did not complete KYC properly, but on the other hand @tumis used harsh words to @Wapinter, that if verified from the trust given by @Wapinter.
In fact, this case has been a long time ago, now the problem has risen again, so as it is now happening, that's my understanding.

So in conclusion: the @Wapinter case with @tumis is a pure misunderstanding between Kyc and the emotional manager and participants, you are a cheating case, another problem.

I am looking way to get rid of but did not get any method .I send pm to the relevant but did not reply yet. I think there should be speedy method to resolve these type of Problems.

Agreed. It falls well below my standards for feedback. A neutral comment on their work quality would have made sense. That's what I base my opinions on regarding actions OP could reasonably take. With what is presented I see the managers actions worse than OP's.

Problem is though OP, went all flammy and ranty as well, I linked it. Not that that deserves red trust but could show why communication broke down. Who knows.

Probably won't come back to comment anymore, this is just starting to turn into another feedback circlejerk discussion, up until OP or Wapinter do something one way or another.

First of all the feedback isn't showing by default. Then it too older and wondering why OP created this thread too late. Wapinter should use the reference link on such as feedback. Not doing bounty tasks properly and asking for a stake isn't sufficient to leave negative feedback without evidence (if not cheating). Although his feedback isn't worthy of the default trust network, it shouldn't use this way. No matter OP is a spammer, this subject should handle by forum moderators.

Since no one can remove this feedback except Wapinter, so you have to communicate with him or he should reply on this thread if he notices. Otherwise, you may take rest since that feedback wouldn't harm you.

Wapinter needs to remove this negative feedback, because even if tumis did something wrong here or overreacted, he does not deserve negative trust in this case.

Tagging a participant not doing sufficient work is wrong in the first place in my opinion. We both will agree that the feedback culture we have in here (red tag for scammer) and feedback culture in a freelancing website or ebay kind of platform are not the same. Not making sufficient work can not be considered as scamming. So, I would say leaving a neg to OP from Wapinter is not justified in the first place.

Regardless of the value, even if they are worthless at the moment it's an agreement to exchange X amount of tokens for work. I think the manager should back up their claim that the work is insufficient, if they tag ta participant and don't pay. OP wouldn't be wrong to tag them as a manager who doesn't pay for work and chooses not to back that up, while providing their own examples of complete and competent work.

You are active in the forum and not having a red feedback from game-protect is a shame. Welcome to the elite club :-P

The last time I checked, he was not in DT network. He is not now too.

What I gathered to know is that Wapinter is just a bounty manager. The question is, will we tag a bounty manager for not getting paid in a campaign? Yes, I understand the responsibility of a manager but in the case of token paying bounties how we handle the case? Those tokens are already zero value when a participant starts their work.

That's not always a rule (although in this case it may work). If OP cannot discuss it over with the one leaving the feedback, nothing else can be done.
Sometimes one has to learn to live with such feedback. For example I have negative feedback from game-protect or spy100.

And although the feedback OPs is referring to is unexpectedly well written, the one writing it has .. mixed reputation; that may matter in some eyes.

It seems like you are trying to moderate the trust system  You or any other DT member can't do anything. I have been with a few red tags which I'm still trying to remove by contacting the feedback sender but they don't want to listen from me.
I had a thread here to remove the feedback but everyone was suggesting me to talk with them, I know that's the only way. You can justify the feedback by giving logic here saying what's wrong and not but asking them to remove the tag being a 3rd person wouldn't be good I think.

This is a troll; check modlog—a bunch of his posts were just trashed, a situation about which he is now whining:


Quoting as circumstantial evidence of a probable fake newbie:  He is highly opinionated about the trust system, despite having registered only a week before making this post, and he is not acting in good faith.

With due apologies for the noise.  I don’t want to create a new topic just for this.

The trust system is not moderated.
If you have a problem with this trust rating, you need to talk to Wapinter yourself.

I guess both of you are mature enough to find a solution for that.

But HCP has a good point here. Why did you start caring about that feedback now.. after 1.5 years?

There is also a reason to bring your feedback issues to the community - I don't see the negative but that's due to my custom trust list. Is Wapinter on DT1 or DT2 or in the mix ?? If, so then whoever has included them in their trust list can be persuaded to remove them, if for no other reason than incomplete feedback.

OP, if you were truly unpaid for work that met the expected requirements and quality you should be leaving feedback yourself and creating a flag. I'd have to check more but this sounds like a Type 3 flag as the bounty threads themselves act as a written contract.

---

As others said feedback is 99.9% permanent, if the creator doesn't budge. I only know of one case in which it was removed and it was particularly egregious. This doesn't even come close to a reason for the admins to interfere.

More to the point grow thicker skin, this is the internet. If someone leaving you incomplete negative feedback which isn't even directly visible, and shows as untrusted feedback bothers you so much take a breath and step back. See it for what it is, insignificant. If there was reason or cause others would have tagged you as well and it would work up to DT members whose tag is visible - These members come from all ranks and activity.

You might want to research the Trust system further, because your actions in scam busting and whatnot are trustworthy behaviors that members look for. I have no plans to research your history or those threads but if you were creating them with the only intention to warn others and keep people safe, why would some random persons opinion (who you likely should have tagged) matter.

LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system

Edit: Just noticed the last exchange you guys had in the topic you bumped. - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50835810

If you are looking for any sort of resolution you should probably create your own topic and present all the evidence if you still have it.

You got the essence here. However, I notice a few things here.
OP comes here 1.5 yrs after wapinter leaves this feedback. Why he had not previously raised the question of the legitimacy of this negative tag?
This feedback without proper reference means almost nothing, obviously, it's just noticed for them when selecting in some future bounties. Yet do not think that is a red tag appropriate measure for this.

As I remember, @wapinter also had some problem with negative trust, but for much more serious reasons. I would expect him to have learned how is hard to improve trust rating and move from negative to a positive status. I find almost all of his feedbacks is without reference, so they leave us only to believe in his word, which will go hard after all the omissions.

For a bounty hunter, 10 companies that don't pay aren't that many. These are people who sincerely believe that it is possible to earn something in such companies. Unfortunately, many are often disappointed.
But for a similar tag set by a company manager, a reverse tag is also possible. How many successful projects did this manager run?
If you ask bounty hunters how much they got with such a manager, I think they will also have something to write and mark with a red tag in the manager's review.

No talk about red trust or vice versa.

@tumis, this is purely the case for both of you between the manager and the Bounty participant, direct this thread to @wapinter PM or whatever, the important thing is @wapinter knows you are complaining about the trust he has given you.

At this time we already know and read all your complaints, it is your right to defend.

---

We want to hear one more word about your case from @wapinter, because I saw @wapinter not using Refence for you and he said you didn't comply with the campaign rules and doubted your translation, which is even worse offensive language.

So, if @wapinter gives a response he is here and presents the evidence against the accusation for you and vice versa.
So, if he is just talking nonsense, to avoid payment, to participants especially you, maybe we can tell @wapinter what is appropriate for you "Deleted or Neutral" in your case.

If what said in the feedback is correct, may be a neutral feedback would be correct to warn other campaign managers. However, have you tried to contact Wapinter? I would suggest you to PM him and ask him to respond here.

Wait... what??!? You only "just" noticed... after 18 months?

And why do you care about that trust rating... and not the one from humancoinnet?



In any case, neither of those users is on DT, so the trust ratings aren't visible by default unless you explicitly go looking for it...



If you "on this forum for a while" as you claim, you should already know that "Trust is NOT moderated". The only person who can remove the trust rating is the person who left it. Go PM "wapinter" if you are so concerned about it...

A trust spammer gave me (and a lot of members) once an imaginary trust feedback while I was less than 1 month old in the forum and I am not sure if I know how the trust system works back then. Anyway I read many complaints or maybe I even posted about it. Long story short, it is unlikely that staff will remove it even if that guy is a proven fake trust abuser. - trust isn't moderated-