Topic: Tecshare Maliciously Abused The BitcoinTalk Trust System - page 3. (Read 7518 times)

I don't disagree with this use of the trust system. IMO it naturally balances out. If you leave tons of negative feedback, people will take your feedback less seriously. I am simply pointing out that it is far easier to attack me rather than some one like you whom, it might be fair to say is in "the good old boys" network, and can push back against his accusations a lot more easily than myself. Basically I am a convenient person for him to make an example of over his frustrations of other people using the system this way far more often than I do, and with more trust. I would be happy to restore his trust to zeros, once he removes his slander from my OPs (his own form of attacking my reputation since he has no trust).

If you are posting about me, why haven't you let me know your feelings before this?  My hunches are always correct, and I try not to leave feedback based on personal opinion.  If I do, I welcome you to call me on it, or send me a PM.

I already made several attempts at deescalating this situation. I corrected my error with the feedback as well as provided him an opportunity to restore his trust rating. My request is not unreasonable. There was never a point when he at any time deescalated the situation. He got the trust rating for his actions, not just "to teach him a lesson". His lesson is he doesn't have to be marked if he can behave like an adult. Additionally I find it rather hilarious you have such an issue with my single use of the feedback system in this way when other users with FAR MORE trust than me on the default trust list leave negative feedback for people based only on hunches or personal opinions. Seriously some of them leave DOZENS of negatives for far less than this. Your complaints should be addressed to far more appropriate parties in your "good old boy network" instead of lobbing these accusations at easier targets like myself. I didn't want to do this, and I made several requests to the moderators for assistance and every one was ignored. I am frankly disgusted I have to defend myself for simply defending myself. HE HAS THE POWER TO CORRECT THIS - HE IS NOT A VICTIM - the only person he has to blame is himself.

This thread is disappointing on so many levels.

Default trust, which can be such a good tool, being used as leverage and "make people learn a lesson", and what's more disturbing is that not only are people willing to turn a blind eye, but that some are even defending it.  I always thought default trust was a fairly good thing, and the self regulating nature of the community would fix any aberrant behavior, but clearly not. Looks like default trust is turning into a good old boys network.

That said, if the community is really okay with feedback being used in this way, then maybe it's time to just change the feedback system to accommodate that, and how the ratings are calculated. A good start would be to change it to where you need to have multiple negatives before it has such an adverse effect on your rating. Maybe people further down on the trust list hierarchy could also have a lesser effect on ratings than those higher up. This would also make using a trust level of 3 more usable than it is now.  


It's not so much this "anomaly" that bothers me, it's the way it's been (not) handled. Can you really read tecshare's posts here, look at the attitude, and say that he should be in the default trust network? Being a good trader doesn't mean you are a good candidate for default trust anymore than being a good poster means you would make a good moderator (it doesn't).

Do you really think that this will be the last time he does something like this, especially with people defending it and saying it's okay?

Would you be okay with this "one time anomaly" if it were you on the receiving end?  

At least you are trying to be the adult and offer a reasonable solution for this "drama". I mean he trolls then comes crying after provoking the entire thing? 

I think most people witnessing his behavior here will deem my actions appropriate. What is important when trading is people know I am not a thief, and my previous trust demonstrates that. You might write this off as being ego driven, but it has a very real effect on my ability to sell when people make a habit of this behavior. Instead of a marketplace thread it becomes a neckbeard herp derp party, at which point no one is even looking at the product any more. There is a lesson to be learned here, I am not about to quit when he is on the verge of understanding the price of his behavior. One way or another he is going to deal with the results of his actions. He can decide which way.

While I do agree with your logic, I do think my advice would result in a quick resolution to the matter. If that is not a priority for you then you really have no incentive to compromise.

I, like you, have a very big ego, probably to the point that it is a flaw. I will personally spend hours at work arguing that I am right, only to be overruled, and told that I am wrong but I will not be held accountable, only for me to say that I still think I am right and that I will decline such leitancy if I am not right.

I bring this up because I think you have a lot more to lose then he does. He can simply create (or buy) a new account to conduct trades on while you cannot (your account protects you from scams while a purchased account does not, his account does not protect him from  scams - you are protected from scams because you have the pleasure of being able to get your counter-party to send first so you can make sure you are not being scammed). Although both you and Vod have a large amount of positive trust, it appears that you conduct a lot more business on here then he does (he can correct me if I am wrong), so you should have very different points of views on your own trust/reputation.

I just want you to prove that insolvency=theft. Is that too much to ask? I am working hard to repay ALL my creditors, it is not fair that I must suffer your accusation when it has no rational basis.

Thief.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8001343

Like I said, you want to engage me like a normal person, pay your debts.

Why is it that you refuse to prove that I am a thief?

Just find a definition of "insolvent" that involves "theft" and you can prove it instantly.

Otherwise it is just a personal vendetta.

 

That's fair.  I would react the same way.

This has nothing to do with risk. He could choose to continue to try to harass me, and I could leave negative feedback again. It is the principal of the matter. He shouldn't have been doing what he was doing in the first place. He was provided many opportunities to leave or diffuse the situation, instead every step of the way he chose to escalate. I have already taken several steps to deescalate this situation. He has taken none.

I feel I have zero obligations to compromise with him in any way, especially since he has demonstrated he is unwilling to do so when offered. Instead he opted to dictate to me what he wants done. He has no leverage at this point. Regardless of this I am again stating I am open to deleting his feedback if he removes his posts in my ops, locks this thread, and deletes me from his signature. He can learn to act like an adult or live with my feedback. Its his choice.

of course you are free to do the same as armis.
but i dont trust armis, but i do trust you: just think a moment why

Like I said he is especially in the wrong as to how he is acting after you gave him the negative trust. (I think he was also in the wrong after he made two or three posts in your gift card thread). Also correct me if I am wrong but all of those posts were made after he received negative trust from you.

If you really want this resolved then I would suggest that you remove your negative trust for 24 hours, and both post here and PM him that his negative trust will stay removed in the event that he either removes his posts or edits his posts so they more accurately reflect facts and give nothing more then constructive criticism. If he complies then you don't bother him again and he doesn't bother you again; if he does not then you can add your negative trust back on his profile; if he removes the posts and then you put the negative trust back on then he adds the posts back to your threads; if he deletes the posts then adds them later then you put the negative trust back on his profile.

You are both essentially trading with "paypal" so neither one of you risks anything by "going first". I understand that you trust rating means that you pretty much never need to "send first" when trading with others and as a result you have very little risk of ever getting scammed, however your risk in this situation really is very low.

I know this is unsolicited advice, and you can take it or not, but that is how I would handle this kind of situation if I were you.

these:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/land-mines-vietnam-era-warning-sign-red-enamel-metal-tell-the-world-u-mines-32469
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--844619
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9438300
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9438146

All I want is my original state to be restored, just like he is trying to get (only via demonizing me in the community rather than just simply deleting his posts and moving on with his life). I am simply doing unto others as they do unto me. He attempted to attack my reputation having never traded with me, and I did the same to him in kind. Why should he be free to do this and I am not free to do the same?

I guess that is fair enough. If you are asking about this thread, then it was for him to try to get his negative trust removed. If you are asking about your gift card thread then it was because he felt that you were charging an unfair price (although I think he should have made his point and moved on).

I would say that you do have the right to say that you "do not trust him" via your negative trust, and he has his freedom of speech to say that he thinks you are misleading people/are dishonest on your sales threads.

I personally think that you both are in the wrong for both of your actions (especially how he is behaving as of recently).

I think the more appropriate question is why did it begin in the first place? I can't find any good reason. I am not interested in negotiating with him AFTER he already screwed up and was given multiple opportunities to resolve this, but refused. If he wants to resolve this all he needs to do is delete his posts from my marketplace OPs, its pretty simple.

Who do you think stands to lose more as a result of this drama?

 I corrected my mistake and I already offered him a solution to this. He could just delete his posts in my threads and be done with this, but clearly he would rather create more drama. Just check out his signature now. Maybe next he will change his name to "tecshareabusedthetrustsystem".

I agree with basically all of this, with the exception that we probably differ in opinion on how "extreme" the circumstances must be.