Topic: Someone lowered my trust, I don't know why. What recourse? - page 2. (Read 6289 times)

Oh if it's for fuck's sake then I think that makes your point a lot more clear.  I get it, for you TF shall can whatever he wants no matter the relevance or the accuracy.  Yes, for fuck sake I undersand you perfectly.


Probably for the best.  If all you can offer is the mantra that whatever tf does or says is right and true then I wouldn't exactly characterize your contributions as helpful.  Ciao!

If tspacepilot had not withdrew any fund from coinchat, and Tradefortress has lowered his rep for no reason, wouldn't the first thing tspacepilot would say is, hey, I never withdrew anything? They have argued about the amount, but the reasonable first step a person would take in defending themself is saying that they had taken nothing. Tspacepilot did not say they didn't withdraw Bitcoin earned by the Bot, they said they didn't withdraw 1.5 BTC or .5 BTC.

also


You didn't withdraw "anywhere near that amount" so you did withdraw something. And you "Almost never" used the illegal bot, but you did use it.

there is not even evidence that the bot even made 0.01BTC until it has been proven everyone should stop taking sides

The rules state that a bot has to have "bot" in it's name, not "b0t". This has been mentioned before. So using that bot would have given you BTC you didn't deserve, because you break the rules.

For fuck sake, stop bringing this up. We already destroyed that argument. You don't HAVE to be in a currency trade agreement for him to decrease your trust rating. If he thinks you scammed him, he is allowed to, no matter if you guys ever made a trade.

God, why do I even bother talking to you. You only see your own truth and nothing else. I am out of here.

Ok, assuming that the bot only made .01 BTC, that means the amount is still wrong, but the principal is the same. Tspacepilot went on TradeFortress' site, and used illegitimate ways to gain Bitcoins. Tradefortress' feedback would still be valid, although he should probably change it to .01BTC if there was evidence.

But really, what is the difference between scamming .01BTC, .02BTC, or .5BTC, either way they would still have the negative feedback from TF and the reason. The arguement here isn't whether or not tspacepilot abused the site and took Bitcoins from Tradefortress, its A) whether its ok to post it on Bitcointalk, a different site, and B) Whether tspacepilot is at fault for abusing the system.

From the hundreds of other cases I've seen, the answer is yes to both. The amount isn't a major factor.

I'm sorry salty but this isn't correct.  

1) The amounts are invented, I;m not sure from where.  Tf asserted 1.5 then .5 and I never withrew near that amount.
2) The b0t thing is a red herring.  Yes I registered that username but almost never used it.  I had hoped to deploy a bot under that name but never got the bugs worked out before I was banned.   Tf and I even had a discussion one time about that bot and he did not object to the name at the time.

To bring us back to the point: everyone agrees that tf and I had no currency trade agreement and that he is attempting to use his influence on a third party site to punish me for his grudge about my use of coinchat.

there is no evidence that the whole amount was made by using a bot as the op has said he talked on there a lot and was playing with a bot so more than likely 80%+ of the 0.35BTC was him talking and 20% was the bot right now there is no evidence on how much of it was him and how much was the bot if anything he should only pay back what the bot earned him

gotpetum brought up a good point a few posts back that I think most people are ignoring:


This quote is taken from the original Marketplace trust thread started by theymos.  Note the giant underlined bolded words.

No, that is not true at all. tspacepilot opened the thread up, asking what happened. Tradefortress explained it to him, and rather than tspacepilot saying, No I never took the coins, or no, it wasn't me, they said, no, I never saw the rules so its ok that I took the coin.

tspacepilot has admitted to chatting using a bot containing the name b0t rather than bot, and withdrawing about .5BTC rather than 1.5BTC, in light of that, how can you say there is no evidence?

I don't think this is right as I only discovered the negative rating because it did show up next to my posts (before I removed default trust).  In any case this is one of the few facts in dispute on this thread which can be empirically measured by anyone

Thank you very much for a reasonable and thoughtful response.  I really only have two small points of disagreement.  The first is that my total withdrawl from coinchat dont amount to more than 0.35, so the 0.5 amount is obviously trumped up.  This is obviously part of the argument that you are elegantly deciding not to be involved with but I wish to make the correction.

The second is that while you are right that if the trust system becomes frivolous, users will eventualky ignore it, there's an assymetry here in that some people are listed as trustworthy by default.  So when those people use the trust system frivolously, it endangers the system (and their victims) even more.  Therefore I believe that the trust system admins do need to reconsider their inclusion of tf on that list of default users to be trusted (or whether such a reified list should exist at all).

Finally, can someone provide a link to a concise description of the trust system and its proper usage?

as said before TF is not in default trust list, therefore most people will never even see the negative rating.

What matters is if TF used the trust system in accordance with its rules. According to theymos, Therefore, TF can use feedback for whatever he wants. If it becomes frivolous, then people will ignore TF's trust or the entire trust system. Action does not need to be taken by the trust system admins.

Since I tend to be very conservative when it comes to deciding if something is unethical, it sounds like TF gave someone .5 BTC because his banning mechanism and bot detection were inadequate, and now he's retaliating through the trust system. However, the OP was gaming the system (coinchat) and not following the rules, and other people would call that unethical. TF would go so far as to say that it's stealing! It's hard to determine if that makes someone trustworthy without a definition of trust that everyone agrees on.

Thank you.  It's refreshing for someone to finally respond with something other than 'pay tf or be shunned'!

Even if I do owe tf something because he paid me for messages that he wishes he hadn't paid me for, the total would probably amount to something closer to 0.01.  In any case my total withdraws on the site dont amount to more than 0.35 so the .5 figure is outlandish.  I note again that he started off at 1.5, then dropped it by 1/3 when people weee taking my side on this thread.

Still this is missing the goddamn point.  tf runs a site that gives away money for chatting.  I chatted for hours and hours and received money.  Tf decided he doesn't want me there anymore, fine.  How does this give him any right to lie about me on bitcointalk.org?  He is suggesting that he and I had some currency trade agreement and that I didn't follow through.  That is false.  I have entered into 0  marketplacd transactions and tf's grudges against former users should not be taken out by him on their trust ratings.  If he is going to act like that, I think it's a strong reason to remove him from the default trust list so that at least new users can make up their mind for themselves about people he holds grudges against.

Again, he suggests variously that I am spamming or defrauding or stealing, sometimes 1.5 btc sometimes other amounts, all based on his whimsy and with 0 supporting evidence.  How is any of this relevant to the marketplace trust?  Even he admits it's not, that it's based on his personal grudge with me about how I used coinchat some months ago.

This is indeed very strange. This would suggest that the OP is lying about it.

the main point I was making is that trade fortress has not provided and evidence that it was the bot that earned the money and not a human as the op says they were talking on there a lot and testing a bot so most of it could be legit and only a small % be the bot we don't know as there is no evidence been shown ether way yet everyone here is taking sides 

I'm only talking about this specific situation, if you're implying that I said TF is always right then you are wrong.



This one is getting a lot of attention because it's in Meta not Scam Accusations.

yet again staff persecuting someone with no evidence 

this is unfair you are backing up tradefortress  when he has provided 0 evidence that any coins were taken  

I have started multiple scammer tag requests on here with evidence and you guys couldn't give a dam about it