Topic: The problem begins and ends with YOU. - page 2. (Read 912 times)

It's clear that theymos and the admins don't care, hence nothing will happen. Like everyone else, you'll eventually get tired of the forum politics and move over to reddit.

I agree most members are consigned to this kind of attitude. So it is join them or be silenced by them.

Not us.

There is something we can do. It is called presenting the observable events that demonstrate they are clearly abusing the trust system to silence the truth regarding their previous scamming, lying and other untrustworthy behaviors and to game the entire system for their own selfish gain.

Then let bitcointalk announce you do not have the right to present observable events from the history of this board about DT members in the rules. DT members are allowed to scam, lie, extort, trust abuse and deploy double standards when ever they like and you will be cast as a scammer for mentioning those things. Put that in the rules, and we can just all abide by them, or move to a board where each member is treated fairly and equally.

You care a bit too much mate, everyone knows that the trust system is just a pissing contest so it isn't taken seriously anymore on the forum. Where free speech is concerned, bitcointalk is essentially a private company so essentially you don't have a right to the platform or anything like that. If users want to suppress your speech by utilizing the trust and merit systems then there's nothing you can do

Yes it is worrying, is it not, that DT's, ALL OF THEM seem either dirty or complicit. Imagine the entire DT not 1 of them dares to or cares to take note of all the observable instances in the past histories of these untrustworthy scammers, liars and do the RIGHT THING.

This boards free speech is being crushed daily. You can not even present observable events without getting red trust.

Merit and DT are the very WORST things that have happened to bitcoin via this board.  The entire communities free speech is vulnerable to this garbage.

I am just waiting for these observably untrustworthy "gang" to pull off something large enough to get the attention of some real law enforcement, and it be clearly demonstrated that their TRUST positions were leveraged to enable such a large scale scam. Then the shit will hit the fan.

It is there in black and white, that this group is untrustworthy. The evidence has been presented many times. I hope all those historically sticking up for, and protecting them here, get the same punishment. I mean a  prison cell will be an upgrade from some of their living standards, but others will not be so keen.

All those including them into the trust system will be culpable.

There should be whistle blower rewards. Not punishment.

These dirty turds are always here to claim they require "the right" to give red trust for ANY REASON they see fit. They are terrified of being given a strict set of guidelines they can NOT abuse.

They can NOT change the past. It is all recorded and historically will be examined. Time is on our side.

Not to mention his extortion attempt
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757

I honestly don't know how this guy finessed his way onto dt

You Lauda accuse the OP of spreading false information?  when you yourself lied on many occasions regarding the xcoin/dark instamine claiming you were on the launch and there was no instamine. This is actually scamming also since you were claiming this to entice investors under false premise and were a self confessed holder of that project . So yes if we have a trust system then if it should include those that lie for financial gain like yourself, then you should certainly have  a red tag. Please red tag lauda for telling lies for financial gain or unfair advantage. If you wish to see the evidence then you may request it and I will present it for the 100th time.

We will not permit observable liars and scammers to lecture and punish others for far lesser crimes.

This is just an internet forum where we talk about bitcoin whenever we have spare time from our normal jobs and lives, we don't need a trust system to know who trusts who for reasons other than trade and deals. After all, that was the main goal behind introducing the trust system, hence why it says "Warning: Trade with extreme caution!" when a negative rating is left.

Quite the lovely waste of time. It is called a system of trust not a system of trades.

This is what spreading false information does to others (like OP); but hey we need a system of trust that is only for trust-farming via pocket-change deals.

To start I would like to thank you for your response and I really appreciate the clear formatting (section you are referring to + valid evidence + your claim).





As for misuse of trust I did make the argument that users taking matters into their own hands is wrong, but I do agree with the statement about there not being a better option. However, I think it's the automatic belief that nothing is going to be done that leads to the bystander bias I reference in a previous comment.

Regarding merit:
Yes I agree the extent to which I argued the lack of merit was a bit extreme. I do think that some members make an effort, however I think there could definitely be more success seen with better implementation.






Yes I do state in the newcomers section that the distrust mainly comes from the great number of accounts created with mal intent. And although I think that there is some help for newcomers, I feel they are given very little room for error in a lot of regards. I am not talking about the obvious spammers but more of the people who come across as unpopular / annoying.

As for your comment on ranks: yes I completely agree with you and I think there needs to be an attitude change. However I realize I wanted to mention that this attitude needs to not only come from higher members but also the newer members as well. I feel like new members expect to much and that is also a problem.

Again, thank you for the time you took to respond and the references you made. You seem to have an opinion that stands out from the rest and I commend you for voicing it.

EDIT: I am exhausted but will take the time to read and reply to as many comments as I can in the morning. I am trying to take as much time and consideration for each comment as I can. The goal of this thread is not only to inform others, but to inform myself as well.

Interesting to see a (reddit) account seller trying to improve the forum.

I think a lot of your stated problems can be traced back to problems with the trust system, specifically from the way trust is displayed by default (DT). My suspicion is that theymos wants to have DT setup in a way that he avoids being labeled a "publisher" in regards to liability for libel. If theymos tinkers with the DT system too much, or if it is moderated too heavily, the courts might rule he is not merely hosting content, but is "publishing" content. This matters because if someone is labeled a scammer via the DT system when they are not a scammer, they could sue theymos for libel, and would do so because he is easier to find, and has more assets than most people on DT (and in the forum).

No one obviously intentionally gets scammed, but there are improvements that can be made upon the marketplace. For starters, there could be merit/rank/activity requirements in order to either start a thread, to unlock a thread (more than x times), or to create a thread with self moderation. This would at least increase the effort a scammer would need to put into trying to scam.

I don't see signature campaigns going away anytime soon -- they bring in the page views that generate revenue for the forum. Signature campaigns ultimately are market based, and advertisers pay as little as they can to get the best deal for them. I would point out that when someone pays to have their ad displayed, they are paying to have their ad displayed to potentially 20 other ads on the same page.

Except for "Lack of new upgrades" everything you are complaining about can be traced back to the trust system.

I would like to thank you for your reply as you include some very valid points and I think it helps clear some things up. First to address your point about my overdramatic rhetoric and somewhat extreme views on either side. Yes I agree that my message comes across as quite dramatic, but it's more of my natural tone when I am passionate about something. This post is more to motivate and encourage rather than to inform and disprove. But yes I believe it's a good point to make that the "difficultly" isn't necessarily the problem, maybe it lies more in the motivation.


Yes I believe I could have better articulated my section about Newbies and the ability to have their voices heard. However, I do think that there are lot of biases here, simply because a lot of the Newbies that aren't spammers are simply never seen. Yes you do see those who contribute meaningful stuff and contribute, but how many others want to but don't get the chance? Whether I'm right in that regard, I have absolutely no idea but I think it's an interesting thought to entertain.


Thanks for sharing your experience this is really helpful, I have obviously not really experienced much of it. This helps me gain some perspective into what other people think on the topic. As for my thoughts on account sales, yes I was wrong to say that it's the only way. The point I was really trying to get across was that the difficultly in ranking up is ONE reason for account sales, disregarding the others.


Yes I do admit they are a bit overdramatic, but they are only really meant as a title for each section. And yes I am continuing what I think has not been discussed thoroughly or thoughtfully enough in the past. I continue because the past has failed. While the author wasn't my favorite, I think this quote helps summarize my point well:




While I don't wish to accuse anyone nor their reputation based on their signature, I certainly think that there could be more achieved through other means. You mentioned poorly managed signature campaigns, but I think a lot of them are quite mismanaged from the very beginning. The line between a poorly managed campaign and a good one seems thin at the very best.


I was simply stating that I understood again because I had stated previously in the post that I realize why these things were implemented, but I believe their purpose has been lost. And this is my main account, and while again that is quite irrelevant I realize that distrust is natural and I understand that. Also, you think I am not aware of the consequences my actions can have? It would be quite foolish for me to believe that anything good would come from this. But for any real change to take place there must be suffering, I mean what I say and I am more than willing to be held accountable. Whether it's just or not. In fact, it only strengthens my argument that people are resistant and change / quick to take matters into their own hands.

I hope to respond to more comments but this is taking me a lot more time and thought than I had expected in the first place. I will try to do 2-3 responses a day when time permits. I will try to be concise and possible, but I have a lot of thoughts I would like to share and a lot of opinions to think about.

Some of the campaigns are just giving the tokens so it is not worth of $30 dollar.
Whom do you think responsible for this shit show?  Forum or users?
(I snipped that part but my guess is you are agreeing with users)


You clearly know who is in fault here.


Frankly speaking, whom you are considering newbies here , in reality they are seasoned scammers. From the very post they know where the lending section/other intricacies of the forum. Anybody want to have a decent experience, first need to observe things and I find very rare examples where users are really paying attention to stickies and rules.


I can agree that forum suspect anybody that is new to the forum but I guess you will understand this behavior if you spend some more time here.




Nopes, but you need skills to find/filter the content of your need

Read my previous answer in "General Toxicity"

Only if you want to participate in Sig. campaigns

I did not understand the gist of your text. Do you mean to say that "Report to Moderator" does not work?

There is no favoritism. Even legendary accounts get permabanned for breaking the rules (most common plagiarism.)  

+1  here, Though epochtalk is in pipeline but I can agree with you till it go live.

Forum administration is not very much interested in generating money from the forum and that is purpose of all the forum you are describing here.

Now I will like to add few things that you did not added.
1. You can get honest opinion in this forum for free.
2.Forum is not at all biased for anything. You are free to endorse your product (if it not illegal and not breaking forum rules). Forum does not give any ratings to anybody (that most of the contemporary website do for money)

I guess , you had not spent enough time in forum and you will gradually understand things.

I appreciate your effort, my thoughts :

Misuse of trust : I agree, but people don't have choice since there's no better system

Lack of content, and incentive thereof

I agree with most your points but :
- Hoarding Merit is member's fault
- There are few attempt to find and merit good posts at :

• https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/self-moderated-report-unmerited-good-posts-to-merit-source-5093271. If you check this thread, people clearly don't care another member receive merit
• https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merit-giveaway-for-forum-contributions-5124596
• https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merit-for-crypto-and-other-knowledge-no-guide-threads-5124376

Automatic hate towards newcomers

I disagree, it happens because majority newcomers are scammer or spammer who have multiple account. If they share something useful or truly want learn more about Bitcoin/this forum, people would help those newcomers/newbie. Few example :
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50291288
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50036053

Rank holds too much importance : I disagree, mostly it's forum member's fault who evaluate member based on rank/merit.

Lack of updates and new integration : I agree, but more modern forum currently is on development.

P.S. your points which i didn't mention means i mostly agree with your point or i don't any particular thought.

I don't know if we are suppose to hate the newbies or we hate the ones who introduce Bitcointalk to the newbies. They we're directed to this forum because that's how it was introduced to the newbies. Living in a third world country, $100 a week from a signature campaign is $100 a week, its better than asking money in the streets or looking for looking for plastic disposable water and sell in the junk shop but then again, it doesn't justify the reason to spam the forum with non-sense opinion just to get paid. Until now I still see posts in FB groups related to Cryptos saying "It's easy to earn money in Bitcointalk by posting", instead of "you can learn a lot in Bitcointalk about Cryptos".

Well, it's also late here, so I'll keep it short.

That's not true at all. Ok, maybe if you want to accumulate dozens of accounts to start shitposting or selling them to make money but if someone is at least a little bit interested in contributions to the forum, ranking up will be no problem at all. You don't even have to know much about crypto, learning step by step is always the way to go. We have a few new users in the German section and there are no problems for them, no harassing by high ranked members and they also receive some Merits if their content is somewhat useful. There is still a lack of Merit sometimes, yes I don't deny that, but it's not that bad how you are describing it.

I'm around here for a year now and can tell you that everyone has the possibility to rank up if he puts a little bit effort into it. My online time is 16 days and that's not much in my opinion. If I had more time I would be online more often but that's how it is. Even as hobby participant it's possible to rank up, so don't tell me the only solution is to engage in account sales and buy an high-ranked account to cheat everyone willing to contribute here and rank up the legit way. 
And then, it's no crime to wear a paid signature, like your accusation sounds like. The problem are poorly managed signature campaigns, the good ones don't make any problems. And ironically, another problem are the account hackers / sellers offering accounts for spammers.

Your various buzzwords we know from previous discussions like "Misuse of Trust", "Ranking up is impossible", "Generalizing that all Signature campaigns are a problem" or "Hate towards Newcomers" let me think that you are just continuing what has already been discussed.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there are no problems but that will just be another discussion like so many before.


Where did you get it before? Not interested to post from your main account?

PS:
And while seeing your long reply to TryNinja, I think I know already that will end up unbeneficially. I'm always open to good suggestions but that won't lead to anything...
When red trust?

Well can't say I'm surprised at this response and I this is pretty much what I expected. I think that many people feel this way and I'm sorry that you happen to be in the line of fire. I feel very strongly in the points I have addressed and I will defend them as necessary. To make this easier on everyone I think that I will try and split this up into smaller parts.

Lets start with your first comment:

to you making this thread? What is your idea to "help the problem"? Looks like you are just pointing out the obvious (which we already know and many users already stated multiple times). Basically, nothing new to see here.