Pages:
Author

Topic: So you have DTs who do not want you to talk openly? - page 3. (Read 1817 times)

legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 7011
Top Crypto Casino
Exclusions have nothing to do with me considering people a scammer, that's what the feedback system is for. I do not consider you a scammer but the fact that you publically post PMs makes me think that you are not trustworthy. Simple as that.
I don't think TECSHARE is a thief at all.  In fact, if he wasn't such a cocksucker and didn't think the same of me, I would have no problem doing a bitcoin deal with him in which I sent bitcoin first.  I don't think he'd run away with my money.

The reasons he's excluded from my trust list are that he's shown poor judgement in his feedback-leaving history, which is the whole reason why he got booted off DT a few years ago, and that he's way too emotional (to the point of being unstable) when I've had disagreements with him.  I had to block his PMs because be wanted to continue an argument in a thread that I didn't wish to continue, and he kept sending aggressive-toned PMs to me.  And look at the neutral feedback he left me, and tell me it isn't aggressive:

Quote
Just because you can't argue your points without personally attacking me is not my fault. You tell yourself whatever you like and block my messages. It doesn't change the fact that you are just a child throwing a fit because I hurt your frail little feelings by pointing out the flaws in your arguments. Of course if you simply just debated the subject none of this would be an issue now would it?

P.S. if I was threatening you, you would know it.

That was in 2016, and here he is, still arguing with people the exact same way.  Meanwhile, I think I've mellowed a lot since then (occasional outbursts aside).  In any case, this is probably why a lot of other DT members have excluded TECSHARE from their trust lists.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Well if the exclusions are for "being a dick", then do you think further isolating me will make me more or less cooperative with the little Stazi community you have going here? If less so, then is not the point only to cause punitive punishment rather than reform? If being a dick and trolling is grounds for exclusion then you might as well wipe 2/3 of the trust list out. BTW being critical of your butt buddies doesn't make it trolling. You are all creating an environment where no one is free to do or say anything unless the collective proscribes it. Sounds like freedom to me!

You're extrapolating bigly and wrongly. You got one exclusion for something you (the alleged dick) did that was considered untrustworthy by a DT1 member. There are still other exclusions likely for other reasons because most of them happened before the "dick move" episode. I doubt any of your excluders care about your "cooperation" since they already consider your judgement to be flawed. But you haven't lost any of the forum "freedoms" either. You can still say the things you want, you can even bring up scam accusations should you need DT action on them. Being so desperate to get into DT just makes you look even less suitable for it.

You're right on one thing. Being critical isn't trolling. That's not why I consider you a deranged troll (or QS, or CH, or Thule).

The freedom I am referring to is being able to be critical of the default trust priest class without the punitive punishment of exclusion as punishment for doing so. No one is free to speak or be critical of the Default Trust Stazi here any more, your continual slander of me for doing nothing more than speaking critically is just further evidence of it. All of those retards are just convenient tools for you to dismiss legitimate criticisms and pretend it is all the same. The primary difference between myself and them is you don't have the convenient option of just labeling me as a scammer so you have to try to lump me in with "trolls".
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
Well if the exclusions are for "being a dick", then do you think further isolating me will make me more or less cooperative with the little Stazi community you have going here? If less so, then is not the point only to cause punitive punishment rather than reform? If being a dick and trolling is grounds for exclusion then you might as well wipe 2/3 of the trust list out. BTW being critical of your butt buddies doesn't make it trolling. You are all creating an environment where no one is free to do or say anything unless the collective proscribes it. Sounds like freedom to me!

You're extrapolating bigly and wrongly. You got one exclusion for something you (the alleged dick) did that was considered untrustworthy by a DT1 member. There are still other exclusions likely for other reasons because most of them happened before the "dick move" episode. I doubt any of your excluders care about your "cooperation" since they already consider your judgement to be flawed. But you haven't lost any of the forum "freedoms" either. You can still say the things you want, you can even bring up scam accusations should you need DT action on them. Being so desperate to get into DT just makes you look even less suitable for it.

You're right on one thing. Being critical isn't trolling. That's not why I consider you a deranged troll (or QS, or CH, or Thule).
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
You people sure do love inserting other topics so you can later convolute them. I made it pretty clear the punitive punishment was the exclusion. The "scammer" part was the pathetic attempt to ASSOCIATE me with scammers by comparing me to Quickseller. Learn to read then maybe impugn my words.

Quick question for you ball bags, do you think your exclusions are going to make me more or less of a "dick"?

Except you're the one inserting that "topic" and making the association with QS' scamming behavior, as opposed to his trolling behavior, which is where you two are like twins.

I don't think you need to blame the exclusions for making you a dick. You seem to be quite capable of that on your own but whatever makes you feel better.


Well if the exclusions are for "being a dick", then do you think further isolating me will make me more or less cooperative with the little Stazi community you have going here? If less so, then is not the point only to cause punitive punishment rather than reform? If being a dick and trolling is grounds for exclusion then you might as well wipe 2/3 of the trust list out. BTW being critical of your butt buddies doesn't make it trolling. You are all creating an environment where no one is free to do or say anything unless the collective proscribes it. Sounds like freedom to me!
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
You people sure do love inserting other topics so you can later convolute them. I made it pretty clear the punitive punishment was the exclusion. The "scammer" part was the pathetic attempt to ASSOCIATE me with scammers by comparing me to Quickseller. Learn to read then maybe impugn my words.

Quick question for you ball bags, do you think your exclusions are going to make me more or less of a "dick"?

Except you're the one inserting that "topic" and making the association with QS' scamming behavior, as opposed to his trolling behavior, which is where you two are like twins.

I don't think you need to blame the exclusions for making you a dick. You seem to be quite capable of that on your own but whatever makes you feel better.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Quickseller is a confirmed con artist.
Bullshit. I have never been credibly accused of trying to steal or misappropriate money.

What a clown show. You pretended to be your own escrow and accepted payment for a nonexistent service. That is theft and fraud. Just because it was JUST A LITTLE bit a fraud doesn't make it ok. Go away now.

Another note for the rest of the clowns:



There is a literal warning not to expect privacy in your PMs with every message you send... but lets all pretend there isn't
copper member
Activity: 2996
Merit: 2374
Quickseller is a confirmed con artist.
Bullshit. I have never been credibly accused of trying to steal or misappropriate money.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
you should exclude Suchmoon too

Thank you so much for digging that up. It was a person promoting a scam so there is that, but if anyone wants to exclude me for it - I'm a big fan of informed decisions so feel free, I certainly wouldn't have a meltdown over this. Some other things to look for in my post history:

  • I may have said favorable things about a site or two that later turned out to be scams.
  • I've said many many NSFW and plain mean things to pretty much everyone I came into contact with.
  • I've been wrong quite a few times and - gasp - may have failed to admit it once or twice.
  • I don't like lemons.

Not a comprehensive list of all wrongdoings but should get you started.

Even the people who exclude me don't bother to argue I am a thief. Keep proving how unbiased you are by comparing me to known scammers to argue your extremely weak justification for punitive punishment.

If you were a thief you would have red trust. As it stands, it's your judgement that is questionable. Your attempts to paint this as being called a scammer show that you either don't understand how the trust system works, or deliberately make yourself look like a victim, neither of which does you any favors as far as your trust inclusions are concerned.

You people sure do love inserting other topics so you can later convolute them. I made it pretty clear the punitive punishment was the exclusion. The "scammer" part was the pathetic attempt to ASSOCIATE me with scammers by comparing me to Quickseller. Learn to read then maybe impugn my words.

Quick question for you ball bags, do you think your exclusions are going to make me more or less of a "dick"?
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
you should exclude Suchmoon too

Thank you so much for digging that up. It was a person promoting a scam so there is that, but if anyone wants to exclude me for it - I'm a big fan of informed decisions so feel free, I certainly wouldn't have a meltdown over this. Some other things to look for in my post history:

  • I may have said favorable things about a site or two that later turned out to be scams.
  • I've said many many NSFW and plain mean things to pretty much everyone I came into contact with.
  • I've been wrong quite a few times and - gasp - may have failed to admit it once or twice.
  • I don't like lemons.

Not a comprehensive list of all wrongdoings but should get you started.

Even the people who exclude me don't bother to argue I am a thief. Keep proving how unbiased you are by comparing me to known scammers to argue your extremely weak justification for punitive punishment.

If you were a thief you would have red trust. As it stands, it's your judgement that is questionable. Your attempts to paint this as being called a scammer show that you either don't understand how the trust system works, or deliberately make yourself look like a victim, neither of which does you any favors as far as your trust inclusions are concerned.
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989
฿uy ฿itcoin

Exclusions have nothing to do with me considering people a scammer, that's what the feedback system is for. I do not consider you a scammer but the fact that you publically post PMs makes me think that you are not trustworthy. Simple as that.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
More excuses

So what part of this makes you less of a hypocrite in your applications of standards for exclusion? Quickseller is a confirmed con artist. Even the people who exclude me don't bother to argue I am a thief. Keep proving how unbiased you are by comparing me to known scammers to argue your extremely weak justification for punitive punishment.
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989
฿uy ฿itcoin
Publically posting PMs is a dick move, especially when you do so to force him into a conversation. It has nothing to do with virtue signalling since I honestly don't care what the "DT mob" thinks of me.

I am not going to exclude Suchmoon for something he/she did over 3 years ago. Unlike some people here I don't dig into peoples past, desperately hoping to find something I can bring up. I would exclude him/her if he/she posted it recently. It might sound strange but some people actually change their behaviour when they grow older, which is exactly why I am open to revising my trust ratings/exclusions after a while. You should try it.

 Whatever excuse you can work out to justify your retaliatory punitive behavior right? One standard for me and another standard for thee. Yes, I am sure you don't care, which just so happens to be why you have pretty much everyone who excludes me on your trust list. Complete coincidence I am sure, clearly no one cares what people on their trust list think. No, you don't go around digging up people's past, you just support those that do. What should I try? I don't go around policing Bitcointalk like some kind of rent a cop like you and most of your trust list do. All I am doing is pointing out your hypocrisy and selective punitive punishment for the well deserved criticism of your butt buddies. I am not forcing Hhampuz to do anything, just exposing how he privately shows one face and then publicly tries to pretend as if I was harassing him which is why he JUST HAD TO exclude and block me.

Quote
Distrusted by:
Vod
Foxpup
TMAN
Lauda
yogg
TheNewAnon135246
EcuaMobi
suchmoon
owlcatz
nutildah
LFC_Bitcoin
The Pharmacist
Hhampuz

Half =/= pretty much everyone. Stop making so many assumptions, you're starting to sound like QS.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Publically posting PMs is a dick move, especially when you do so to force him into a conversation. It has nothing to do with virtue signalling since I honestly don't care what the "DT mob" thinks of me.

I am not going to exclude Suchmoon for something he/she did over 3 years ago. Unlike some people here I don't dig into peoples past, desperately hoping to find something I can bring up. I would exclude him/her if he/she posted it recently. It might sound strange but some people actually change their behaviour when they grow older, which is exactly why I am open to revising my trust ratings/exclusions after a while. You should try it.

 Whatever excuse you can work out to justify your retaliatory punitive behavior right? One standard for me and another standard for thee. Yes, I am sure you don't care, which just so happens to be why you have pretty much everyone who excludes me on your trust list. Complete coincidence I am sure, clearly no one cares what people on their trust list think. No, you don't go around digging up people's past, you just support those that do. What should I try? I don't go around policing Bitcointalk like some kind of rent a cop like you and most of your trust list do. All I am doing is pointing out your hypocrisy and selective punitive punishment for the well deserved criticism of your butt buddies. I am not forcing Hhampuz to do anything, just exposing how he privately shows one face and then publicly tries to pretend as if I was harassing him which is why he JUST HAD TO exclude and block me.
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989
฿uy ฿itcoin
With the given situation you are in the red tag Lauda gave to you is justifiable, your account is obviously created to complain about the DT system and it's probably you are one of the members who got tagged by a DT member one way or another. Based from what I have seen DT members are more lenient and understanding to high ranking members or at least the trustworthy ones since they have the balls to complain about it in their own account unlike you who just created an alt account to cover your identity. Keep in mind you are tagged because you are using an alt account that is trolling in the forum and not because you are standing up against them. You aren't even really standing up because you are just hiding in your alt account.

Is that so? Maybe some one should tell that to the 13 cult members excluding me because they don't like my criticism of their pals. I am sure the long list of people on the list no one has ever heard of are far more trustworthy. My crimes are too numerous to count after all.

I can't speak for the other 12 cult members but I excluded you after you publically posted a PM between you and Hhampuz. I don't exclude people if I disagree with them or just because I think that they are assholes.

I see, so the fact that I posted that message is more of a problem than his duplicity and inability to have a conversation like an adult. Got it. You know what would have prevented that? Him willing to have a conversation about it, instead he chose to hide like a coward rather than explain himself. The message had nothing exceptional in it other than a demonstration of his duplicitous behavior, this is just a pathetic excuse for you to virtue signal to the DT mob. There is no presumption of privacy with personal messages. If this is your standard you should exclude Suchmoon too. I am sure I could find plenty of other examples of people on your trust list that have shared PMs as well, but oh that's right you people only apply these standards to others when it serves your bias. This is just a woefully pathetic pretext for retaliation.

Publically posting PMs is a dick move, especially when you do so to force him into a conversation. It has nothing to do with virtue signalling since I honestly don't care what the "DT mob" thinks of me.

I am not going to exclude Suchmoon for something he/she did over 3 years ago. Unlike some people here I don't dig into peoples past, desperately hoping to find something I can bring up. I would exclude him/her if he/she posted it recently. It might sound strange but some people actually change their behaviour when they grow older, which is exactly why I am open to revising my trust ratings/exclusions after a while. You should try it.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
With the given situation you are in the red tag Lauda gave to you is justifiable, your account is obviously created to complain about the DT system and it's probably you are one of the members who got tagged by a DT member one way or another. Based from what I have seen DT members are more lenient and understanding to high ranking members or at least the trustworthy ones since they have the balls to complain about it in their own account unlike you who just created an alt account to cover your identity. Keep in mind you are tagged because you are using an alt account that is trolling in the forum and not because you are standing up against them. You aren't even really standing up because you are just hiding in your alt account.

Is that so? Maybe some one should tell that to the 13 cult members excluding me because they don't like my criticism of their pals. I am sure the long list of people on the list no one has ever heard of are far more trustworthy. My crimes are too numerous to count after all.

I can't speak for the other 12 cult members but I excluded you after you publically posted a PM between you and Hhampuz. I don't exclude people if I disagree with them or just because I think that they are assholes.

I see, so the fact that I posted that message is more of a problem than his duplicity and inability to have a conversation like an adult. Got it. You know what would have prevented that? Him willing to have a conversation about it, instead he chose to hide like a coward rather than explain himself. The message had nothing exceptional in it other than a demonstration of his duplicitous behavior, this is just a pathetic excuse for you to virtue signal to the DT mob. There is no presumption of privacy with personal messages. If this is your standard you should exclude Suchmoon too. I am sure I could find plenty of other examples of people on your trust list that have shared PMs as well, but oh that's right you people only apply these standards to others when it serves your bias. This is just a woefully pathetic pretext for retaliation.
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989
฿uy ฿itcoin
With the given situation you are in the red tag Lauda gave to you is justifiable, your account is obviously created to complain about the DT system and it's probably you are one of the members who got tagged by a DT member one way or another. Based from what I have seen DT members are more lenient and understanding to high ranking members or at least the trustworthy ones since they have the balls to complain about it in their own account unlike you who just created an alt account to cover your identity. Keep in mind you are tagged because you are using an alt account that is trolling in the forum and not because you are standing up against them. You aren't even really standing up because you are just hiding in your alt account.

Is that so? Maybe some one should tell that to the 13 cult members excluding me because they don't like my criticism of their pals. I am sure the long list of people on the list no one has ever heard of are far more trustworthy. My crimes are too numerous to count after all.

I can't speak for the other 12 cult members but I excluded you after you publically posted a PM between you and Hhampuz. I don't exclude people if I disagree with them or just because I think that they are assholes.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
With the given situation you are in the red tag Lauda gave to you is justifiable, your account is obviously created to complain about the DT system and it's probably you are one of the members who got tagged by a DT member one way or another. Based from what I have seen DT members are more lenient and understanding to high ranking members or at least the trustworthy ones since they have the balls to complain about it in their own account unlike you who just created an alt account to cover your identity. Keep in mind you are tagged because you are using an alt account that is trolling in the forum and not because you are standing up against them. You aren't even really standing up because you are just hiding in your alt account.

Is that so? Maybe some one should tell that to the 13 cult members excluding me because they don't like my criticism of their pals. I am sure the long list of people on the list no one has ever heard of are far more trustworthy. My crimes are too numerous to count after all.
hero member
Activity: 1680
Merit: 655
With the given situation you are in the red tag Lauda gave to you is justifiable, your account is obviously created to complain about the DT system and it's probably you are one of the members who got tagged by a DT member one way or another. Based from what I have seen DT members are more lenient and understanding to high ranking members or at least the trustworthy ones since they have the balls to complain about it in their own account unlike you who just created an alt account to cover your identity. Keep in mind you are tagged because you are using an alt account that is trolling in the forum and not because you are standing up against them. You aren't even really standing up because you are just hiding in your alt account.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
If this was Medium I'd give you 50 claps and then log on to a different account just so I could give you 50 more!

Did you just admit to wanting to make alt accounts so you can give people more internet points? Wait until QS hears about this!
Next up on America's Looney Tunes Gang: Hhampuz embezzeling medium claps. Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1989
฿uy ฿itcoin
If this was Medium I'd give you 50 claps and then log on to a different account just so I could give you 50 more!

Did you just admit to wanting to make alt accounts so you can give people more internet points? Wait until QS hears about this!
Pages:
Jump to: