Topic: @THEYMOS Abusive group punished DT1 for speaking up against them - page 2. (Read 3477 times)

This has shown itself to be true.

It didn’t used to be this way. In the past, a person was forced to defend controversial ratings. Today their supporters will troll the person who receives the negative ratings that are unjustified.

I don’t see how anyone could take the trust system seriously after seeing this kind of reaction to a dispute. I also don’t understand why someone would possibly think it would be a good idea to run a bitcoin related business on the forum when you know there is a potential this will happen to your business.

Consider for just a second, lets say Lauda or whoever else leaves controversial negative trust. Your options are A) Spend a year fighting it to no recourse, or B) Say, yeah whatever I don't care what this guy thinks. I'm not saying its a good thing that people leaves controversial feedback, I'm saying worrying about it is a waste of your time. Ultimately who is in control of your reputation is you. You've been trading here for years, do you think Lauda's feedback would effect the trust that thousands of people have in you? And in the case that you were a new user, could you not just use escrow and build up your reputation to the point where thousands of people have trust in you? I feel like the argument against my opinion is that every user here is a robot unable to read feedback, detect bias, and the weight for feedback from known shaky characters for being a "liar" or whatever else, is the same as someone claiming that you scammed them.

I've managed to avoid harassment because I don't engage with people's provocation. There is always someone trying to start something, I'll say my peace if I feel so inclined and then I'm done. If someone wants to insult me, have at it, I've got thick enough skin but I wont give you the satisfaction of overreacting and making your day by becoming enraged. From my perspective, you are handing groups of people with 0 authority complete power over you. Its like bullies in elementary school, they can make faces at you all day, but they'll get bored if you don't start crying and screaming every time they do it.

I'm not against you in saying that it sucks people are trying to be internet bullies, I'm saying that everyone is turning a molehill into a mountain. If someone leaves you bad feedback, let them make a jackass out of themselves and discredit themselves. As soon as you fly off the handle and let loose on them, people start to think that maybe the negative feedback is valid.



I'll get back to you on this

It sAys PerSoNal nOt PrivAtE.

QS likes to nitpick over small things to divert attention away from the actual subject; posting PMs publically is a dick move and a big no no.

Yeah, the same feeling here, another thread about "abuse", screaming ritual invoking the Great God of all Thermoses that might appear in person here posting something like "everyone is free to do what he wants, I don't see a real problem, I won't act unless...keep walking ...feel free to continue the last part I've cut out from your post" and next week we will have another topic with the same debate over and over...

We need a head to head section where only the selected users can post, they can't delete the other's post and send all these neverending discussions there.

I know I'm a bit late to the party, but does this count?

As usual, your standards only apply to everyone else, not you and yours.



Your forced memes are a very transparent effort to cover your abuse with schlock in a pathetic attempt to put googley eyes on the turd that is your behavior and pretend it is just a funny emoji. You are a pile of shit with googley eyes stuck on it. Its not cute, it smells and it needs to be cleaned up.

With Thule, CH, Quickscammer & co.

You are missing a major point ( signature campains) .

Most managers don't accept members with a negative trust from DT member which i don't find very reasonable but still.

That is one reason why so many people spend a quarter of their lifetime debating DT and trust shit, i am pretty certain if signature campaigns focus on merit / quality post and cancel the trust rule, many people will stop caring - because as you mentioned most people here don't trade, and once they happen to do so - they use escrow anyway!

I am not sure what you are agreeing to, because I do not agree that none of this abusive behavior here has any real world consequences. Legitimate users often spend YEARS carefully and laboriously building up their reputations, taking risks all along the way in order to do so. Then a band of obsessive compulsive control freaks come along and strip that reputation with no examination, recourse, or accountability for ANY REASON they can dig up or manufacture in an instant. Are you saying your reputation is worthless? Are you saying that everyone who considers trading with people carefully examines the validity of ratings before deciding to trade? Are you saying it is likely that users whom the trust system was designed for most, new users are able to tell the difference between a real negative rating and a manufactured baseless one?

Oh well shit, you manage. I am sure everything is great for you in mod land. I am sure that offers you no additional protection from this sort of harassment right? In that case since it is not a problem for you personally it must not be a problem for anyone right? You are totally avoiding the point and essentially saying the trust system doesn't matter. The point is the lack of accountability. The point is it is totally convenient for PROTECTED people such as yourself to brush this off because you don't have to worry about it in the slightest, and pretending it is a non-issue is a far easier solution for you personally seeing as it has no cost to you. The point is double standards, selective enforcement, and ambiguous ever changing unwritten rules. Essentially what you are saying is this place is a big fucking joke and no one should invest any time money or effort into it because some retards LAARPing Game of Thrones can take it all away at any time. If you think the internet has no capability to have real world repercussions on people, I am sorry but you are either a fucking moron or totally disingenuous.

I don't think its a reasonable risk, so not worth worrying about. When it comes to forum drama, I agree that there is no real world consequences, just an absolute waste of time. Every single day real businesses get slandered by fake reviews. Restaurants will hire people to leave fake Yelp reviews for competitors. That is the world we live in, yet they manage. I understand that it takes time to build a reputation here, but considering that the circle jerk of people complaining are not involved in business here, and those that are don't seem to have any inconvenience cast upon them, I'm hesitant to feel bad for them. Its a moral crusade for them, they have not been cut off from their income. Even despite years of this same stuff going on, I haven't seen anyone suffer any unreasonable repercussions.

If I could leave negative feedback saying "Tecshare is an evil purple alien, avoid his laser beam at all cost!" and that has any effect on your business whatsoever...I really don't know what to say about that. There is absolutely no reasonable solution in that case.

For the record, I'm not saying I support anyone's behavior, I'm just saying its not worth your mental health to get too involved in it. People are going to think whatever they are going to think, if you must control the narrative, you'll go insane.

This is ridiculous. I've defied Lauda lots of times and I've never been punished, at least not too severely.

It's perfectly clear. None of those people are invited to our felching orgies and the few who are understand that Lauda (and everyone else involved) has a reasonable expectation of privacy re their genitals. Why do you even care so much unless you want to get some of this action, too?

So the IRS potentially kicking in your door is not a significant consequence? Everyone here likes to imagine this forum is just like a video game with no real world consequences. The fact is many people depend on this forum for income and this mob behavior can and does do damage to ones ability to trade here. This place is so rife with fraud building up a reputation is not an easy or quick task. It takes time, money, risk, and effort to build your reputation here just for it to be destroyed in an instant in retaliation for criticizing the wrong people. You poo poo at the idea and say people will just ignore invalid ratings and the like, but who actually takes the time to validate these ratings? Almost no one, and the ones who most need to are the least likely and the most populous. In effect this has serious repercussions on ones ability to solicit trade here among other real world consequences imposed by these control freaks.

a. Browsers of the forum not logged in, who's opinions don't matter in the slightest would see a warning saying that someone has given you negative feedback.
b. Who cares? Are you doing business with them? If so would they not look at your feedback, if not, why care what other people who have no interaction with you think? I think you are a 9 meter tall purple dragon, do you need to prove me wrong about that?
c. Who is to judge what is related to scamming? The users that read your feedback. Maybe lemon hate is part of my fanatical religious belief, and other lemon haters out there need to know your preferences on lemons. Those that agree with me about lemons will take my warning to heart, and those that think I'm a nut job will ignore it.
d. Just because its not working the way you'd like doesn't mean its not working. There are some new interesting developments with DT, but I don't think it has yet stopped serving its intended purpose. People are just fighting over DT ratings while those actually trading continue to operate as normal, completely detached from who left someone feedback for lemons and who is a jerk.



I do not. As apparent, people say whatever they want regardless of trust bullying. Some people make alts, others send private messages to tip off others. Choosing not to speak up is a choice. Come on now, we are talking about forum politics, no one has your family kidnapped. Lauda can't actually whack you if you speak out against them, and it sure would be awful if they gave you frivolous negative feedback that would help you further your point. Free speech does not mean that you can say whatever you want without people responding however they see fit. Freedom of speech is to protect you from the government for saying something they don't like, not to do whatever you want on an online forum without people getting mad at you.


Not really, still just looks like everyone has hurt feelings. What has your refusal to be pushed around accomplished besides spam? I'm not saying you are wrong to stand up for yourself, but what possible damage could have been done? I just think you are wasting your time. Just saying, "yeah whatever man" when Lauda goes on a power trip is just as effective as spending 120 hours composing posts about how outraged you are.  Why has their ability to earn from sigs been taken away? Does every single campaign operator value Lauda's feedback?



What if Lauda comes to my house and pisses in my cheerios? What do I do if they threaten to dox me if I don't pay up? I suppose I'd contact an admin or global moderator. Illegal activities result in bans here. If your investment is so shaky that a lie from Lauda can ruin it, you are an idiot for investing in it. If I had a bunch of red trust tomorrow and for whatever reason it was all staged perfectly so that I couldn't refute it, I'd ask MinerJones to escrow for me when I make trades here.


I don't acknowledge DT as a position of power. It sucks that things aren't fair, thats how the world works. All of these rights and fair things you keep talking about are government guaranteed rights to protect you from systematic abuse. The government doesn't have the right to say, alright you plagiarized so your life is over, but your account can be banned for that reason. You don't have a whole lot of recourse if someone decides to pick a fight with you on an internet forum, as long as its within the rules.


Fraudulently obtaining money from someone, with cash or cash equivalent changing hands.



Do you know how many people on this forum have killed another human? Do you know how many have committed actual serious crimes and have never been caught? I don't know either, but if you care too much about everything around you, you'll drive yourself crazy. Everyone on the internet is a liar to some extent. My real name isn't SaltySpitoon! I casually sprinkle a lie into my posts now and then, I don't actually believe you are a 9 meter tall dragon, and I used my measurement in terms of meters to possibly imply that I don't live in the U.S! I'm not going to worry about things outside an immediate sphere of feasible threats. Sharing a PM is a behavior I find untrustworthy, to me it means that someone doesn't respect a user's privacy. When I'm buying or selling something here, I use my real name. I am under the assumption that with reasonable people, they will not act in a spiteful manner such as releasing my information if I do not prompt them to do so, for example by scamming them.


Nope, because for the past years that I've been trading here, that hasn't seemed to occur.


Not interested in any brainwashing you are attempting. I've been a member here for 8 years, and was a moderator for ~5 years. I've got a pretty decent idea of how things have worked around here, where the troubles were, and how they were fixed. I really don't mean this as a insult, but if this isn't all just a game to you, I pity you. I'm sure there is so much more going on right now that you could use your time productively for. In the grander scheme of things, this is just as stupid as getting into a month long fight with someone on Reddit that insults your mother. None of this has any meaningful impact on you, rise above the forum bullshit and reclaim your time.

As for me, I've got a couple of days off and nothing better to do, so here I am! But, I'll go back to ignoring your long rambly posts that inspire me to write equally long rambly posts soon.


This is my TLDR:

Who cares about what people on the internet do or think, worry about real problems. If you don't have more pressing problems, I guess good for you? Getting spun up at every provocation and atrocity committed against you is not the way to go.

Also:





*edit*


Good to know.

I think the point is more that encrypting a PM is a way to signal that you wish for the information to remain private, and providing an encryption key is a way to signal that you agree to keep encrypted information private.

If you send me information, unsolicited and unencrypted, there should be no reason to believe I will keep said information confidential because that is not something I agreed to do.

Similarly, if you send me bitcoin, unsolicited, to the address in my profile, there should be no expectation that I will return it to you upon your request -- I would return it to you, if I can and if I reasonably believe it was sent to me in error, but if I cannot access the money because of a lack of backups, I did not properly keep the private keys safe from malware, or hackers, if the address belongs to a charity, or to some third party or some other similar reason, I am not going to dip into my own pocket to send money back to you because I did not agree to safeguard your money, nor did I have the opportunity to negotiate the terms of doing so. (I have not ever posted that anyone can "just send" bitcoin to the address in my profile).

If you had contacted me, saying that you want to provide sensitive information that you want kept confidential, I would have the opportunity to either promise to keep the information secret or to negotiate other terms to safeguard the information, including under what circumstances, if any, it can be disclosed. If you just send me information, unsolicited and unencrypted, I have no way of knowing your desire for confidentiality, and since I have not agreed to keep the information secret, by default would be willing to disclose the information if the information is relevant to a discussion.  In regards to the message Bill Gator received, I don't see evidence he either agreed to keep the message confidential, nor did I see the desire it be kept confidential in the body of the message. 

The reason why you would send me a Personal message is because you specifically want me to see it. If you post something to me in the altcoin section, I can almost guarantee I will not see the message. If you post a message to me in another section, I may not ever see it, or it may be a long time before I see it.

Let's try this...

1. If you left me red trust for liking lemons then
a/ browsers of this forum not logged in would see a message strongly suggesting I am a scammer.
b/ people reading my posts who do not go to the trust page will likely assume I am a scammer.
c/ If everyone leaves random red for things not related to scamming the trust score is no longer helpful against scammers
d/ People are not removed and it does not fix itself as far as we can see under the new system.

2 trust bullying has HUGE and far reaching implications for free speech. It is undeniable and crazy to say it does not matter. Unless you do not care about free speech.

trust bullying allows DT members to punish whistle blowers which obviously facilitates scammers.
the message from LTC that was revealed demonstrates his actions were that of someone intimidated and scared to do what he thought was the right thing. This again facilitates scamming and influences a persons right to behave how they feel they should.

3/ Well you can see how LFC was effected. Now bill will be effected in a different way to nutildah. We have not been effected since we refuse to be pushed about by this kind of lying scammer and his grubby little clan. It is quite reasonable to believe many others behaviors are effected in the same way.  Thule and others have been effected since their ability to earn from sigs (like you do) is now taken away. What if they needed that money?

4. Wrong. Lauda has proven he is far more dangerous. The sheer number of instances of him being directly involved or implicated in untrustworthy and scamming behaviors of course endangers people on this forum. How can it not? What if they find out who you are and threaten to doxx you if you don't pay up? what if they lie to you about the initial distribution of a project and the colluding instaminers dump it all crushing your investment to zero?  what if they decide to try to benefit from your funds you trust them with for escrow and they lose it all trying to gain from some fork?  this is dangerous for the entire board and the reputation of the entire forum? what if you spoke out about an observable instance of they lying or scamming and they all red trust you?  we feel you may sing a different tune.

5. Don't care about double standards? nobody is entitled to anything fair? so you would elect people to positions of power and trust and not care if they dole out double standards and are observably unfair? this leads to corruption, scamming and a toxic environment here. People naturally want things to be fair. Double standards are sickening.

6. You do care about scammers ( a little bit)? so scamming as in lying or deceiving others for financial gain? you accept this is the definition of scamming?

7. You don't care about liars unless you trade with them personally? but do care if someone shares a pm they did not promise to keep secret? just trying to get a feel for the mind of SS here.

8. You don't care in the slightest about people using red trust to silence or attempt to silence whistle blowers? which obviously increases the probability of people getting scammed? or using red trust to gain support for their agendas? this a legitimate use of red trust to you?

Having said all of this we are more convinced you are just a bit of a strange individual perhaps rather than an ardent supporter of scammers and liars. Perhaps there is hope for SS. Perhaps just needs to be nailed down to a full debate and reprogrammed a little bit. You seem to be only able to consider what you consider are direct consequences. The world is not that simple I'm afraid. There are far reaching and very damaging consequences for the thing you say you do not care about at all.

Look CH, my point about lemons is that anyone can leave anyone feedback for any reason. Feedback means absolutely nothing without a reason that others accept. I don't accept negative feedback for account buying. You don't accept negative feedback from the group of people you dislike, thats all I meant. I could leave you negative feedback for liking lemons, and people would simply disregard my feedback, that is how the system works. For that reason, it doesn't matter if people leave you stupid negative feedback as long as its honest. I can't leave you negative feedback saying you scammed me if you didnt, but I can leave you negative feedback for having hyphens if your name if I so desired, people would just disregard it. The way the system is set up is that if you leave feedback that the majority of people disregard, then your feedback is useless and you don't deserve to be on DT, eventually you'll be removed, and the problem fixes itself.

I don't care about what Lauda does, because I don't think it matters. They can try to be a trust bully if they want, as I said before, this is entirely about hurt feelings. Show me a business owner or any individual marketplace goer who has had their sales unreasonably hurt by Lauda or anyone else for this matter, and I'll start to care. For that matter, show me how you have been effected in any way since becoming a target of Lauda and gang?  I've had pms from Lauda asking me to do things, I've had others ask me to do things about Lauda, I'm not interested in getting into online fights with people I don't know and will never meet.

Who is more dangerous to the board? Neither of them, they are both inconsequential to "the board". They are having a personal spat that in no way effects the Bitcoin forum in any way. I don't care about double standards, they don't matter because this is a private forum, no one is entitled to a fair anything. You can't regulate personal relationships between hundreds of thousands of users.

Do I care about scammers? Somewhat. Do I care about liars? If I'm not trading with them, not really.  Do I care about trust "abusers"? We have very different definitions of trust abuse. Your definition, not in the slightest. By my definition, somewhat. Just to be clear, I don't support anyone here. I have two or three pals that I know in real life that use this forum that I care about then there are a handful of people here that I enjoy having conversations with, and people that I wish the best for, but I don't "support" them. I have no different impression of Bill than I have with you, Lauda, or almost anyone else in this thread.  

You are all taking yourself way too seriously. Nothing will happen if Lauda is free to pretend to have some sort of weight to throw around, nothing will happen if you complain about it. If Lauda and cronies find their way into the forum database let me know.

I read through this thread.

... ^{s_igh. _***}

---

Yet another pointless topic.

We have:
Another @theymos thread
Nominal hearsay evidence being used as concrete proof of malice
Keyboard raging. Deflection. Reflection. Confections.    
Empty threats. Insults. Blanket statements.
Rhetoric. Pretend arguments. Ad-hominem attacks.

---

Don't you get tired of the egotistical masturbation?

That would depend on how convincing your arguments were. Like for instance the crap you tried to push that liking lemons is a valid reason for red trust.  Most of your reasoning is highly questionable verging on ridiculous. When people tie you down to a debate you run off. This could be why the people likely smarter than you are not convinced by your ill thought out opinions most of the time. I have NEVER seen you come out opposing the scammers and liars here yet. For that reason I view you and your motives as dubious and untrustworthy or at best you are a coward hedging your bets. Either way the question is

why on this thread specifically about double standards and DT intimidating others are you focusing on this 2ndary and possibly off topic point about sharing a PM? that clearly demonstrates there is intimidation and gang tactics at least in lfc bitches mind. 

Is lauda and his gang intimidating others? is he a liar? do you think he tried to extort people? how about his shady escrow?  is bill more untrustworthy than lauda for instance in your lemons opinion? also I heard lauda rubs lemon juice on his asshole before lfc bitcoin rims it (if lfc has been particularly good that day) ? surely that makes them far more untrustworthy right? which of the 2 if you could only pick one would you view as more dangerous to this board? lauda or bill?

Try for once not sneakily finding away to protect the real scammers and liars here.  These people are scum. Help get rid of them or you are part of the problem.

Surely you are not that crazy to believe "saying" someone told you that they are scared of the gang carries anything like the weight of the actual message are you? please stop posting this drivel. Start getting back on topic and saying yes it does look like there are clear double standards ie the nutildah/bill , yes it is obvious lauda and his bunch of scum use red trust to silence whistleblowers, yes there is clear intimidation and manipulation. Man up salty stop being a snide scam supporter.

Yes posting a private pm from someone who is apologizing about fucking you over because they are scared is a bit unsavory, however let's bring into focus and see how small of an issue this is compared to the a group of scammers and liars using dt to control free speech here.

Why should you expect a PM to be private if its encrypted? I expect you'd give the receiver a way to unencrypt the message as its intended for them. What prevents them from posting it after unencrypting it? I also don't see anything about posting your own sensitive information in the scam report format. The whole basis of the argument is that Bill could have handled this better. They could have said the same thing they wanted about Lauda without calling out the person who gave them the information, that explicitly stated that they weren't saying it publicly because they were afraid of retribution.



While Bill may not agree, I'm sure it has become clear at this point that a fair number of people agree with this sentiment. People of sound mind are able to put aside their personal beliefs for the sake of reasonably interacting with other humans, ie not spitting in people's hand during a handshake, or holding back offensive language when talking with certain people even if its part of your normal vernacular.

Its not like talking some some of the bricks here that you could spend all day trying to convince that the sky is blue, but it would never sink in.