Topic: StonerStanley Retarded Attempt At Extortion (Read 1200 times)

Feel free to quote some abusive trust ratings I have left Vod, it seems every time I ask you to back up your assertions you find something else to focus on.

Since my words clearly don't mean anything to you, let's try responding to your post using some of your words.

You are being consistent at abusing trust.    You keep offering to stop pretending to be a doctor if I removed my trust against you.    That is also a retarded attempt at extortion, as the feedback I have left for you is consistent with yours. 

But you didn't complain back then and we all know how much you love nutildah, and now you are complaining because nutildah removed something you think it was wrong.

Seems you liked that feedback, that's why you kept very silent about it and now you are upset just because you don't see it any more. Here, take a look:
Troll didn't say a word, that's it.

I am being perfectly consistent. Leaving a red rating for them wasn't right to begin with, but Nutilduuh doesn't agree. Removing the rating in exchange for clearing their own and because the enemy of my enemy is my friend type of logic is also abusive. If Nutilduuh thought the rating was valid and was needed to prevent the user from harming others, removing it in exchange to get their own removed is not right either. The contradiction is his, not mine. You all have fun doing your clown dance.

I suspect it's much simpler than that. If TECSHARE doesn't like you - you're not gonna be compliant with his standards no matter what you do. It doesn't even matter if any standards exist, he'll just scream "abuse" if you post red trust, don't post red trust, remove red trust, include/exclude/uninclude/unexclude people, report or don't report posts to moderators, etc.

Maybe Techy could supply a list of his standards and which apply to people he likes vs dislikes.

All these standards are confusing - we need an oversight committee to create a new classification for these standards.  :/

So which standards are we using here? Certainly not your guild's - I don't see anything there about removal of red trust being considered as abuse. Did you just invent a new standard for nutildah?

Lets try different approach here. Do you think nutildah abused trust when he tagged StonerStanley?

If you do, why didn't you call it abuse back then?
If you don't think it was abuse, why don't you tag account yourself?


Fixed that link for ya, shill.

That really depends on who's standards you are judging by. I chose not to use red trust, Nutilduuuuuh did. This is independent of other trust system abuses perpetrated by all of the loudest parrots in this thread. Yes, I AM the one twisting everything into some kind of misconduct, such behavior you, Nutilduuuh, and Bozoza are all above doing amirite?




Speaking of trust system abuse...

You mean like when you included account BitcoinSupremo because you don't like some users and those users ended up DT negative because of your actions?

Or your abusive DT manipulation with reciprocal inclusions for your own personal goals? You are not really the one who should lecture others about trust system and scream "abuse".

Does that mean red trust for those "abuses" would be abuse of the trust system? But somehow nutildah removing red trust is also abuse of the trust system?

It's almost as if you have a grudge against nutildah and try to twist anything he does into some sort of misconduct.

Yes, my words, which you accused me of cherry picking by making a statement. Weird, I didn't know one could cherry pick one's own statement as they make it, but ok. Grave crimes? No. very clearly documented abuses in public? Absolutely. Who said I didn't give a fuck? So because I don't abuse the trust system like you all that means I don't give a fuck?

Nutilduuuh is not obligated to do anything, however the fact that StonerStanley has a very clear vendetta against me was more than enough reason for Nutilduuh to cut them some slack. If they had a vendetta against you for example, that never would have happened, hence my raising the issue that Nutilduuuh uses the trust system as a toy to suit their own personal goals at the cost of the overall community, much like the rest of the parrots squawking up this thread.

Those were your own words sparky. It's not really my fault that you're trying so hard to make shit up that you inevitably go overboard. Fortunately you have no capacity to step back and admit that you've been wrong so it's always fun to watch you make more shit up to cover up the shit made up previously.

So to recap: nutildah is excusing grave crimes (or at least two of three grave crimes if we buy your latest excuse) that no one else really gives a fuck about, including yourself. Since when is nutildah obligated to be your personal enforcer?

Techy no likey Stoney. Techy like nutildah red trust. Techy say no word. Nutildah remove red trust. Techy no like nutilda remove red trust. Techy upset now.

I see! It has to be ALL THREE otherwise it doesn't count! Careful you don't sprain your ankle doing all those backflips.




Ah, yes, it is all very technical and nuanced. So nuanced it can mean opposing ideas at the same time. I already explained how it effects me. Weird that you have given negative ratings simply for having alt accounts in the past, but those were people who disagreed with you, so that was ok. This person disagrees with me, so best to overlook it since it serves your personal goals and soothes your emotional voids at the expense of the trust system and overall community.

LOL

Nice sweet cherries you picked there. Here is what I said:


The highlighted part is what nutildah is allegedly "excusing". So why would you cut out only part of that sentence... rhetorical question. Please carry on making up bullshit accusations out of thin air.

The Clowndetta™, the one you, Nutilduhh, and the same group of white faced red nosed floppy shoe wearing tards have very obviously been perpetrating for years. Everyone else didn't place the rating then remove it.

No one placed a red trust rating for him?

ABitNut   2014-07-08   Reference   "This is an alt account, so whoever you're dealing with is hiding."




I am not trying to do anything but hold you accountable for your actions. So this isn't what you were saying here?


I don't need to red tag you or Stoner for it, because unlike you I don't abuse red trust ratings. This does effect me, trust system abuse effects everyone.

What vendetta? You're the one making the contrived circular accusation of excusing "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abusers" merely because nutildah removed red trust. By that logic every single person on this forum is excusing "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abusers" because no one has posted a red trust rating (or any kind of rating) for StonerStanley about him being a "sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abuser", including yourself.

No, I left him a neutral documenting his alt. I am following the objective standards I promote. Just be careful you don't puke all over yourself spinning so hard.

Nutilduuh did however leave a negative that they felt was justified, then removed it in a mutual trade. Weird how your inquiries only go in the direction that serves your vendetta just like Nutilduhh and the rest of the clown car riders.

You haven't red-trusted StonerStanley yourself. Why is it an issue that nutildah removed the feedback? Or are you excusing the abuser too?

Frankly this idiot is inconsequential to me. Highlighting Nutilduuh's emotional use of the trust system to excuse sock puppeting, extortionist, trust system abusers is more of the issue.

And how exactly does this affect you? It sounds quite silly even by your own standards to get upset about every action that involves somebody who doesn't like you.

Nutty no likey Tec. Soney no likey Tec. Nutty help Stoney, cause Nutty like Stoney no likey Tec.

Can someone please ELI5. Usually I'm pretty good at deciphering TECSHARE's conspiracy theories but I can't figure out how this (nutildah removing neg trust) is supposed to be harming him?

No, as you can read there i talked about the fact that you insulted him. Everything is clearly explained. " i harrassed someone who disrespected me and who is the same person below that start disrespecting you"



And this private message from you before you started to disrespect me, show clearly what you think about Vod and other members that were on the thread and how you talked about them. All that because i was peacefully talking with them. Peacefully.
It was far before i started to disrespect you.

Anyway i do not have time to waste in such conversation.

I see, so your defense is your rating was invalid to begin with.

Conceded? What did I concede exactly? StonerStanely is a manipulative cunt just like you are, and he played you like a fiddle jumping in while you were all riled up and got you to wipe his rating clean because you were so pissed off at me. This is funny because he is also pretty retarded, but he managed to manipulate you anyway. Lets break this down...

-You left a rating you say was invalid to begin with

-This sock puppeting extortionist trust abuser manipulated you into removing it because you were so emotional and thought it was a way to "get" me because you know he, much like you has an obsession with me

-Here you are once again trying to make this into some kind of crime I perpetrated to distract from your own irrational and emotion based actions

In summary, you are ok with a person who is a known sockpuppeting, extortionist, trust system abuser as long as it serves your personal vendettas. Is that about right?

I was on the nutildah's blacklist so i finally posted a message on the forum to reach him.... (no, it's not as complicated as you pretend)

Since everything i said on my message is a part of truth and a part of my thought, you shouldn't call it a manipulation.

I also removed my negative feedback from your profil at the same time, you probably didn't even see it because i didn't tell you anything about it.... So i'm far from being a manipulator.

I don't want more problem and i'm aware of my mistakes, you should also think about it. I'm a person not a puppet.

Thanks.

My negative trust for Stanley was based on him harassing DT members. This is one of the more flimsy things to base a red trust on (in my book), and I decided to be forgiving about it. He asked in a courteous way if I would remove the negative trust I left on his account (albeit in the wrong section of the forum), which was a big step up from his previous behavior, so I did. As a result, the situation has been de-escalated.

Q: But what about him promising to remove his negative trust on you? Doesn't that count toward some kind of extortion attempt, to which you willingly conceded?

A: We all know his feedback does not show up as default. If I cared so much about about it, I would have been bothered about it in April.

The extortionist pops up again, this time manipulating Nutilduhh into trading for an exchange of trust rating removal based on their mutual disdain for me off topic in the Politics and Society section.



I see, so you asking me for help, then me going out of my way to help you just for you to talk shit and post my PMs is me disrespecting you first huh? Interesting. BTW why the fuck are you even posting this in Politics & Society? Oh that's right, because you know it is a convenient place to manipulate that retard Nutilduh using the fact that they confuse emotion with logic to trade a mutual removal of trust ratings based on the fact that you both don't like me. What a couple of dopes.




I wonder if TwitchySeal still holds this opinion. I would love to hear some more of his usual mental gymnastics when he contradicts himself.

A PM like that ought to be made public IMO, so you'll get zero criticism from me for quoting it here.

I have to admit that I don't know the entire situation, since I can't seem to muster up the patience to read this thread from start to finish, but I'd say you're right to tag him.  The dude seems hostile, volatile, and ultimately untrustworthy--and that's what the trust system is for.

Normally I don't publish peoples' PMs if I suspect they are being anything less than a total dick, but:

Public Service Announcement: Trust lists are supposed to be decentralized. That means if people are excluding whoever they want from their lists, the trust system is working as designed.

Exclusions means someone doesn't trust your judgement of decisionmaking. It would be insane to force someone to trust your judgement, and will only keep you excluded from their list.

More retarded threats. I didn't do anything to you. You did this all to yourself.

Users face the problem with Brother Printer offline, such as they are not able to print the document to your install Brother Printer offline windows 10. Because show the printer offline. You will some setting adjust and you can able to print. So, I have explained some setting you can follow the step by step and resolve the issue.

Following the example given by his pal Timelord, TECSHARE started 7 weeks ago to distrust me.

On March 27th, 2020 I PMed him, kindly asking to le me know what led to this decision. I stated that I'm not interested in changing his decision, just to tell me why.

He never replied.

However, I didn't distrust him back, nor gave him any feedback.

https://youtu.be/Y9KyBdPeKHg?t=25

So he can disrespect me but i can't disrespect him ? You are a very dishonest person.
You had a chance to not get a negative feedback from me, but you blew it. According to the fact you are not a trustable person because you have a sens of the morality that is very wrong by defending someone who disrespect me.

(since i give up this account you can do what you want )

No, it doesn't say so under my name.

As far as I know, Moderators can't read other user's PMs. Only Admin can, and I'm pretty sure they won't bother to read it.

Great! Now act on it

You had a chance to help yourself out earlier when you PM'd ABitNut, but you blew it:


You can't talk to people that way if you want them to do something nice for you.


You did not "move on." You left him a negative trust and called him a scammer. So much for anybody attempting to be the bigger man.

Exclude ABitNut from your trust list and appeal to others to do so if you have a strong case. Don't send PMs to people asking them to modify their trust lists for your benefit, but most importantly don't use red trust in this situation - it won't resolve your issue... we have enough bullshit retaliatory ratings courtesy of OgNasty and other morons.

I definitely understand the situation and what you did is absolutely wrong.
Let me just give an example.
If I included LoyceV in my trust list, and LoyceV wrongfully left you a negative feedback, do you think it's morally right for you to leave me a negative feedback just because LoyceV is in my trust list ...that's exactly what you are doing... TECshare hasn't scammed you, has he?

Stop misusing trust ratings.

I'll remove it when he will remove ABitNut from the trust list because ABitNut is not a trustable person since he gave me a negative feedback for no reason and that i don't deserve a negative feedback. That is the TECshare fault if ABitNut is in this list. And anyway he talked to me like a little kid and a puppet, he disrespect me. I don't even understand how this guy can get a merit for this post with all he did.
Everything are in my "My Messages", any moderators can see how he talked to me like a puppet and how he disrespect the forum.

The fail is when you don't even understand the situation but you talk about it.


At the begginning i contacted TECShare but he talked to me like a puppet and a kid, told me to shut my mouth while trying to help me at the same time (he should start to learn how to control himself before trying to control a keyboard). I made a thread to ask why i have a negative reputation at the same time and he took it personnally because he understood his fault, he tried to defend his own reputation using me and i repeat: he told me to shut my mouth.

You are moderator? Check my private messages, and check how he talked to me.

I already read your link.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

The purpose of retaliatory feedback is not amelioration of the situation. No, it is a grasp for pride - a meaningless pursuit of restitution - vengeance fuels further vengeance and begets suffering on both ends. Familiar with the tragedy of the commons? Even better, model it as a prisoner's dilemma with a trust matrix and you'll start to understand.

---

Regardless of the instigator, if you choose to continue a pointless battle, you have no one to blame but yourself. Further coercion of other participants only drags the battle onward until you decide to finally step back, take a look at the bigger picture, and cease the indignant whining.

Let me summarize what happened for anyone who doesn't bother to read the thread or still doesn't follow after reading. Just before the thread linked above occurred, I was added back to the default trust list. His rating from ABitNut then became visible. StonerStanley PMed me asking for assistance.



I then replied in the thread, first asking StonerStanley to remove the retaliatory rating he left, then attempting to contact ABitNut to see if he was willing to reconsider his rating. In the middle of this process, the usual clown car, now seeing I was on the default trust list again, and managed to just resolve a dispute involving several of the members of the Turkish community who they were actively trying to get removed from having any influence in the trust system, organized their usual 3 ring circus in an attempt to derail this mutually restorative solution I was attempting to mediate. They then used the thread as a venue to try to discredit me with fairy tales, fictions, and assumptions carefully crafted to impugn my character completely unrelated to the thread.

As a result one or two members then excluded me from their trust lists, specifically citing the accusations made in this thread, thus again removing me from the default trust list, and again making ABitNuts trust rating not visible. At this point StonerStanley got what he wanted, and didn't give a shit that my attempts to help him were being used as a vector of attack against me. He rejected my advice, became very indignant and rude, and then started attacking me himself. At this point, as he was the one asking me for help, and asking for my involvement, I rightfully told him to go fuck himself. He, not having any clue how the trust system worked, assumed he got everything he wanted and was happy to spit in the face of the only person actually trying to help him.

That brings us to now, when I am again back on the default trust list, and his negative rating from ABitNut is again visible, and he is upset because I refuse to comply with his demands after the way he acted, and essentially using his own negative ratings against me in a lame attempt to try to force me to remove ABitNut from my trust list.

TL;DR: He asked for help. I tried to help. He thought he got what he wanted, talked mad shit, attacked me, I suffered a hit to my own reputation as a result of the cumulative lies and attacks, and I told him to go fuck himself and that he would get no further assistance from me.

Sending negative feedback because someone distrusted you is totally wrong... It's total abuse of the trust system and i would advise you to remove it because thing might backfire on you soon if other DT members start tagging you for sending unnecessary feedback.

A trust list is mostly based on what someone personally thinks of other people. You can't force them to change their opinion about you. You should have addressed this issue in another otherwise this is a fail.

You're going at this the wrong way. Please start by reading LoyceV's Beginners guide to correct use of the Trust system (translated into 12 different languages, which shows broad community support for what I wrote).
First: anyone can include or exclude anyone they want. This isn't moderated, but more importantly: you shouldn't take it personally!
Anyone can also leave anyone any feedback they want. This too isn't moderated. However, if you ever want your feedback to mean something (by reaching DefaulTrust), you'll need others to include you, which they may do if they think you leave valid feedback.

Again: you're taking the wrong approach. You could discuss this in a new Reputation thread, but none of this is a reason to leave negative feedback.

TECSHARE included ABitNut more than a year ago. The only thing that changed is that TECSHARE reached DT1 recently.

I don't know. If you open a new topic for this, I'm willing to look into the evidence. But it still doesn't justify negative feedback.

I gave him a negative feedback because he put my name in the distrust list for no reason and he did the same with my second account Virtualis Games for no reason.

He put my name in the distrust list because i was trying to explain myself about a situation where TECshare made an error but TECshare was trying to make me close my mouth like a dishonest person. He put "ABitNut" in the trust list but this user abused of the feedback system since he gave me a negative feedback for "multi account" without any reason (muti account and what ? it makes me a scammer ?)

TECshare was playing a personal fight against "Vod" and others users while trying to "help me", but apparently it was more about his reputation than to really help me, as you can see right now again because it would be simplier to remove ABitNut from the list than making a thread, since ABitNut isn't  able to explain him.

So what if i make another account to present my project ? i'll get a negative feedback because i have another account to present my project and i'll get a big red ribbon saying that i'm a probable scammer. Nice.

He is suddenly bothered because some one in my trust list has given him a negative rating previously, and since I have recently rejoined the default trust list, this is now visible on his account. He doesn't understand how any of this works. You might want to read this thread for further context: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/solved-abuser-gave-me-a-negative-feedback-5182530

He gave you negative feedback simply for distrusting him ? I don't know the history between you 2 but kind of agree that it's messed up.

Also what impact does the trust/distrust hold other  than being able to see more clearly the people who get tagged by them ? Is there something else that I'm missing ?

I got this wonderful PM today. Clearly he is learning from the example being set around here by the clown car. Behold, your retarded manipulative offspring.


StonerStanley   2020-03-19      "liar and manipulator"


~StonerStanley
~Virtualis Games