Topic: Theymos OUT OF CONTROL !!! (Read 1065 times)

Of course no position from theymos even so many members are unhappy with that situation.

Thanks Captain Obvious. Let me restate a very simple question.


All the gibberish above is very nice and all, but how do people adhere to an agreement when they don't know what they are agreeing to? This may be just a forum, but how many millions have used it, and how many billions of dollars have flowed through here? Oh right this isn't just another forum. The point is if you expect people to follow rules (an agreement or contract), then how is that EVEN POSSIBLE if the rules are not codified? Is there some kind of Matrix type mind download I don't know about new users get when signing up? Can they learn Kung Fu too?

There is no one here to stop mods and staff from making judgement calls OUTSIDE of those rules, but you might have to explain yourself some times if you do (horrible I know). Again, ultimately how this unfolds is up to Theymos if he chooses to even get involved. The point is you are leaving many thousands of people GUESSING what they should be doing and causing astronomical amounts of conflict that could have otherwise been avoided by some simple official rules people can reference. The only kinds of places where the rules work like you propose are totalitarian dictatorships, and Theymos has indicated that it is not his desire to run the forum that way.

I can not agree.

1. persons who stand up for what is honest and true ( by reasonable human standards) are to be trusted more than those that wish to crush their right to honest and fair treatment.
2. The best scammers are very civil you won't get far as con man attracting attention to yourself and becoming very unpopular. They are no less likely to sell your address or keep your btc. They are civil until they vanish with your money.
3. I actually find it very gross to watch people that are obviously wronged (by any reasonable humans opinion) just enduring it and trying to slink around people and win favours that way. Of course you can and should try being reasonable at first but once you realise they have no intention at all of being reasonable in return then as thule says the options tend to run out. Accept the abuse or make it uncomfortable for the abusers and all their supporters or even the weak that will not stick their necks out to do the right thing.

Now of course the subjectivity is where these abusers can lurk untouched. This is just an excuse for them because they can construct all kinds of unreasonable nonsense and just say that is their opinion, and since its subjective then can then grasp at the weakest and most improbable connections  to piece together some specious theory as to why you are untrustworthy pr "guilty" and not the innocent party.

Hence the absolute need for standards which will prevent such gross abuse.

I mean one can always make some nonsense argument that is highly improbable verging on ludicrous to justify their actions.

For example. (you is not you SS in particular but anyone wishing to just use subjectivity as means to make unreasonable arguments)

You steal someones expensive car and then  smash it into them - killing them -- having never met them or heard of them before.
Most reasonable persons would say he was the innocent party.

You will claim he was not innocent. He was wealthy and you were poor. He should not have been so greedy and donated his money to charity not waste it on expensive cars. His greed killed him. You are innocent and now have the mental scaring to deal with having had to witness his putrid greedy body explode on the windshield, you therefore require compensation from his family members.

Or if that  did not go over well with the judge, then you could say that you just saw him eating lemons and therefore he was just obviously untrustworthy and net negative to society. Where is your reward?

Subjectivity allows all kinds of madness to be crafted into specious explanations of selfless guardianship /being a good cop. However, in some cases it is actually just the control and abuse of honest members who are the innocent victims, they are then cast in a poor light by weight of numbers that collude as one gang of self enriching bullies.

You need criteria that is applied to everyone equally or that is unfair in itself. All DT need to follow the same mandate and same criteria. Any grey areas that pop up will have to go to a higher power. However, flout the mandate and criteria more than once you're out. Hence they will be super sure before attracting the attention of that higher power.

The point that I've been trying to get at, is that innocent is subjective. Some people think account sales make you guilty. Some people don't. If you leave someone negative feedback that says, "I'm leaving this person negative feedback for buying/selling an account" then only the people who think account sales make you guilty would care. Those who don't care don't magically see the negative comment as anything more severe like fraud.

Sure, you can wage war against anyone who gives you an unfair shake, but you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. You don't need to suck up to someone, if you just act like a normal human being under the assumption that a mistake was made, these things solve themselves more often than not. Otherwise you just deal with your difference of opinion and move on. Flying off the handle just makes you look guilty to people you may have looked innocent to otherwise.

Or, you can fly off the handle and just use escrow I suppose, though then people worry about giving their address out to someone who can't act civil.


More to the OP's point, accounts that incorrectly cited things from 2014 aren't getting banned for plagiarism. The whole plagiarism thing didn't come about until fairly recently, so its not dealt with in the same way. Old posts are typically left alone as well, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by posts from 2014 getting accounts in trouble now. If we had steadfast rules that said plagiarism = ban, moderator discretion on the matter wouldn't exist. That moderator discretion is what allows them to see the difference in intent when it came to copying a news article five years ago, versus someone stealing ideas to disguise their spam posts to up their post counts.

That post is only useful to those that are willing to accept that systems should remain in place that allow the innocent to be mistreated in the first place.

That  post is a good guide if you only wish for your own red trust removed and care not about others being mistreated by the systems that are left free to do so at will.

Leaving systems to remain where abuse of innocents is acceptable and sanctioned therefore allows free speech to be crushed.

In life one must not only consider their own welfare because eventually ignoring the mistreatment of other innocents will negatively impact on the entire system which we are all part of. The eventual outcome will be - be join the abusers or get abused.

You certainly do have the right to wage a war against ANYONE that supports or sanctions the abuse of innocent people. They are no better than the abusers and actually worse because generally the abuser has some direct selfish gain (which humans understand) the supporters of abusers are simply ass licking wussies that just want to be shielded from abuse or get into positions to abuse themselves. Absolute dirt.

I for one will never suck up and slime around them for approval and for trust abuse to be reversed. Remove it else be reminded of the truth regarding your actions over and over until it sinks in that I will not permit it to go unanswered. I have plenty of time and plenty of enthusiasm. I never came looking for trouble with these people they showed up in my threads abusing me verbally with lies and then tried to bully me with their red paint because i dared to stand up to them and tell the truth regarding their own lies and deceit.

Remove the abuse and improve yourselves or be removed from the trust system. Those are the only options ahead.

I will try to answer your question OP. I was one time in a situation like you. I was red painted by very reputable and high-rank members even mods and was able to get my trust in a polite way just like any other member so far, I assume.

I made no magic trick and I didn't have any friends on the forum at that time.
When I was looking for help on the forum, I was reading reputation threads from members in a situation like me, I think this is obvious behavior.
What hit me immediately that "honey catches more flies than vinegar" and every time a member goes on war with people who mistrusted him in his reputation thread this brings nothing good and nobody likes such a behavior because even if you are innocent that doesn't give you the right to go on open war with half of the forum.

Like any other member, I have opened my negative reputation thread, contacted members involved and waited for them and community to react peacefully, months long.
Just like OP, I thought I haven't done anything wrong and always taken into consideration my error-free past. I was totally convinced that I should be never punished and treated like this.
But I never lost my temper and was always calm, polite, and mannerly in my statements. Despite things didn't go well for me and just after I opened my reputation thread even more red trust hit my account.

Despite everything I have never lose my temper and calmly waited for involved members to react sending them a PM with reminders once a month and bumping my thread with one post a month too at this same time. Finally, a few other reputable members come to my thread, looked into my case, helped me to understand my mistakes, and helped to move further. Of course in my case, there was a misuse of reputation feature and several objections were sucked out of the finger against me.

I felt bad too and I thought it was not fair but after 6 months I managed to regain my reputation. Despite everything, this was only possible because members which red painted me finally after months of reminders started a conversation with me and accepted my explanation and actual involvement in the forum. I am still sure that this was only possible because I was always calm and polite.

Never started a war within my reputation thread or anywhere else because I knew that is not the way it works here.

Yeah but uhh... this is a forum. You don't need a court of impartial lawmakers to be sure that people's rights aren't being infringed. Pretty much all that should be guaranteed is that conversation should be allowed to happen, but thats up to Theymos as well. Your reputation can be ruined by any anonymous jerkoff who wants to call you a bad name if you don't have anything to stand on, thats how internet forums work. People in general are smart enough to be able to figure out for themselves whether a claim against you is valid or not. Anything anyone thinks they are entitled to is just precedent set by the good faith thats been done up until now. I'm not saying people don't have the right to complain when something is unfair, but there are a lot of people that need to take a step back and chill.

Trust, merit, etc are all constructs for use by the userbase, again steadfast rules limit the usefulness of tools given to us. By allowing the rules to evolve to suit users needs, the people implementing the systems don't need to be in touch with what it'll be used for. They just develop tools and let the users figure out how they want to use them. I think its safer to say that we all deserve to expect an unfair shake and be pleasantly surprised when things work out, thats kind of the way of limited moderated internet interactions. Someone claims you did something to a goat, you accuse their mother of being that goat, etc.

A lot of these issues would be solved if everyone just played nice with others, but that isn't the case.

*edit* Side note, a lot of the unofficial rules here are created by the Moderators without Theymos' say. At any point Theymos could decide, hey I don't like that, so thats not a rule anymore. Hence why a lot of them are unofficial.

My original point was that thule potentially may have got a raw deal, but at the same time plenty of people see red feedback for account trading and don't care. It didn't ruin their ability to conduct trade here or anything, it ruined their ability to conduct trade with people who think they are untrustworthy for buying an account.

Global rules, you mean.

Zero-substance posts are not allowed in any part of the forum.

---

No one cared about plagiarism. Hm...

Oh no! I read the replies and the conflict is really hard to resolve and it gets worst.

OP, has some point also but I guess it would be better also to let all this things passed, forget and forgive. No one will going to win in this kind of issue.

what's wrong with my english? do i have some grammatical error? can you just answer the question? why are you asking who's alt you are talking to? do you need to tag me as well? DT position doesnt mean you cant be untouchable here,the only difference between us,is you have your DT medal so dont think you are above us.I am one of the pioneer here,is that enough?or do i need to tell you that i am here long before you?

Amazing how this pattern keeps revealing itself isn't it? Theymos doesn't want to implement hard rules. The rules remain unwritten. The forum creates its own arbitrarily and selectively enforced patchwork of rules also unwritten, a user comes along and would otherwise be "law abiding" if these were published rules, they get their reputation destroyed never ever being aware these rules exist. These rules may be obvious to people like you who frequent the forum more, but they are not immediately obvious by any means.

In fact the importance of promulgating laws is considered so important in most legal systems, that if a defendant can prove sufficient notice of the existence of a law was not given, they are not responsible for the legal violation. This also demonstrates itself in the legal precedent of ex post facto law. If I commit an act that is legal today, and a law is passed against that act tomorrow, I can not be held responsible for violation of the law because I had no possible way of knowing it was to become a crime. How do you expect a party to agree to a contract that is unwritten and ever changing?

These precedents exist because they prevent abusive or destructive uses of the legal system. The idea that people here have to perpetually follow a arbitrary and selectively enforced unwritten patchwork of rules is asinine.

Scamming people is allowed by forum rules as well. I think it was pretty well established that account selling was untrustworthy by 2014ish? if I had to take a random guess. Pretty sure it was listed in the original post of the unofficial forum rules thread. Its not something that was agreed upon recently. Forum rules aren't decided by community morals, but if it makes you feel any better, your negative trust doesn't mean too much to me as I don't find account selling that untrustworthy. You don't seem to have much business history anyway though, I'd value that over your other ratings if you had any.

No comment on the merit stuff, I don't care about any of it in the slightest, so my opinion holds no weight on that.

Some times gold has a titanium core
Some times Bitcoin is Bitcoin Cash
Bitcointalk is not what it used to be either

It might still exist but it will continue to degrade from a historical institution to 4Chan with an extensive research library.

Once upon a time, gold firstly used as mean of asset storage.
Once upon a time, bitcoin created by Satoshi Nakamoto.
Once upon a time, bitcointalk forum created.

Gold has still been here, and will be here for ages.
Bitcoin has still been here, and will be here for ages.
Bitcointalk forum has still been here, and will be here for ages.

Redsnow I believe, although I though he was granted a reprieve with just a sig ban? so not too bad. A real enthusiast will not care about not having a sig. I think Theymos tries not to let the scum bags here get their way fully on ALL things.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting Theymos has done anything to do with a scam or is he done anything that could even require a trust related feedback. So not sure why you would say that?

Thule and others including myself are perhaps just hoping Theymos can start to see how it appears from our POV that are collateral damage to the long game that he is perhaps counting on and perhaps giving it a bit of a better start to speed things up a bit. It can certainly look like this system is starting off in a very one sided way but the worst part is the observable double standards of those that are DT members (not theymos and a few others). It is quite sickening to watch them lecture others on lying and financially motivated posting. I mean thats without them red trusting persons telling the truth about their wrong doing.

@LFC bitcoin - your post is again observably double standards. You are missing the point.

If others can merit on a political basis then that should go for anyone. NOT that my posts come under that essentially anyway I say they are merit deserving regardless.

Also bring me my posts that have had merit applied then we can compare these to your posts or others that get politically motivated merits for posting misleading net negative junk. If you are sure that they should not have been given merit by Stingers. We can compare.

If stingers can be removed then get foxpoop, suchmoron and most of the other merit merry go round banned too.

More like if we look at your own merit fans and recipients and the gangs we will see a lot of them all riddled over your top fans and recipients that is why you are protecting them.

The thing you are missing is they have histories riddled with proven scammy pasts full of lies and double standards and signs of greed and sneakyness. I'm sorry but when this all gets ironed out it will show for  historical you were on the wrong side of this.  You may not be the worst, but supporting observable scum and untrustworthy manipulators and schemers is nothing to be proud of.

Oh come on. That’s just a step too far, stingers was one of the worst Merit abusers here. Look at hos Merit sent history ober the last 120 days. Loads of it is to shit posters in that ‘let’s exclude Lauda thread’. He was actively trying to get all of those sock puppet accounts to 10 Merit received so they could get a vote on DT.

He’s also sent you 29 Merit in the last 120 days. Maybe that’s the real reason you’re a little annoyed he’s not a Merit source any more?

Hey douchebag,what is your fucking problem with me? who's alts? are you going to tag my account if i have alt? your a piece of shit whom doesnt deserve your DT position.
How the fuck my account do something about the OP's topic? do not derail this topic moron.


Brush up on your English before you start trying to get heavily involved in Meta. You’ve also just implicated yourself for having multiple alts.

Hey douchebag,what is your fucking problem with me? who's alts? are you going to tag my account if i have alt? your a piece of shit whom doesnt deserve your DT position.
How the fuck my account do something about the OP's topic? do not derail this topic moron.

Who's alt are you? because im going to tag it with multiple accounts.. LOL  

Exactly, he is talking about a member, some members, some report, a member, thousands of members but not one single example or at least a link to a topic where this "crime" has been committed.


Who are those members?


Again, tell people who and what and when and how.
Seriously, I have no f word idea what happened.

But to sum it up, at this point with all those accuses against theymos (with proofs as you claim) and you still haven't left negative feedback? Do it!!!!!!  

It was actually 13 minutes and 55 seconds before your post. (It was meant to be 15 minutes, but I was having trouble with these cheap Taiwanese flux capacitors.)

Also - "he"? Does that mean I'm not a vixen any more? And I was beginning to enjoy it, too.

This demonstrates a willful desire to apply merit to posts that are stacked full of misleading junk and just generally net negative. Just so long as they support his political views.

The post that they rushed to plaster with MERITS

1. admits he has not even read through the thread? but still wants to voice apparently an on topic and relevant rebuttal
2. Makes many false claims.
3. I challenge them to bring forth from my post the incorrect parts which obviously constitute "walls of garbage"  where is he??

I mean he has not read them, makes false claims and does not respond at all to my challenge.

LOL then a turd like tman gives it 10 merits? don't tell me that piece of mindless garbage is a merit source, how could that fool tell a valuable post from non valuable even if he was not a crook??

Then after foxpup reads my post and quotes part of it he then still decides to merit it. Haha

Fox pup - he is one of those Theymos can thank the most for making the merit system a complete and utter joke. This fool loves taking piss about his merit abuse.  Go view his fans and recipients he pumps 100's of merits to the "gang" to the point it looks so obvious and scammy that  - the pharmacist started saying (when I pointed out how he was just plastering his post in merits with  a few seconds between each splat of merit) I don't know why he keeps meriting me so much. I mean he surely recognised it looked insane.

I mean pull up the posts he merits. They are predominantly shitposts.  He is at the top of the back stabbers thread for just splashing out merit to other "gang" members by the TON.

Take stingers merit source away... I would start looking at the real culprits here for politically motivated merits, at least stingers merited some very good posts that deserved merit.