Topic: THEYMOS - we want open debate on how YOU are on the wrong path here. - page 3. (Read 1744 times)

Then you should express your view more clearly. I do not share or understand your view that DT is centralised when its own members disagree about who should be allowed in it. It's hardly the ideal model of a single-minded colluding group, you have to admit.

Only if it ceases to be interesting. You'd better not bore me by repeating the same tired rant over and over again.

Good vixens always come when called.

No need for embarrassment it is possible that you are the only person that will dare attempt a real debate with us. That is more worthy of merit than most posts that have been slathered up in merit.

It is good that we are drilling down to the crux of the matter and the real items of contention that we should thrash out.


1/ Well, some minor, and maybe some not so minor things done in the past by some members have been forgiven by the general community and I do agree with some of these instances of forgiveness.. So you are not just going to get everyone out that has ever done anything wrong in their past ever.. It's just not going to happen..
You don't have to like all of them but you will need to get onboard with a little forgiveness especially if you expect any to be returned to you..
Some can probably be removed for some things, but not all of them for every little thing..

I would likely be more concerned about current and future poor behavior rather than past behavior..
Watch for current and new things.. The past is mostly settled already wither you agree with what the outcome was or not..

It is EXACTLY the transparent and fair definition of minor or major / not really financially dangerous / crosses the threshold that meets the SCAMMING or ATTEMPTING to scam in a directly financial sense that needs to be defined. The current double standards are quite terrible.

So for instance - telling lies to deliberately mislead investors into a monstrously premined and centralized scheme because you hold bags of it is to me a serious matter. It is scamming investors into believing the distribution is wide and therefore much less high risk that a tiny few people who can manipulate and dump at any time. This is a VERY SERIOUS instance of scamming/ deception for direct personal financial gain. It could have cost the board $ 2 000 000 000. That taken on its own is bad. When you start to notice this person is also implicated in an extortion attempt, shady escrow, and then abusing members trust who present links to those instances. Then we notice his VERY close supporters are escrow scammers, implicated in the same extortion and then abusing by their own admission members for presenting those instances again.

Then we can safely say that if these types of people do NOT meet the threshold of HIGH RISK FINANCIALLY to this board. You can forget about ANY person reaching that threshold.

If this happened in the past or it happened yesterday the fact that they have not been punished and no other DT members consider them worthy of punishment demonstrates clearly these DT members are NOT fit for their positions.

That is undeniable. These are the BITCOINTALK JUDGES.  You do not put people that have proven they will scam or will facilitate scamming in a trust position EVER. Time and forgiveness does NOT come into this.

There are several reasons for this.

1. Their punishment of other members for lesser crimes will never seem fair and therefore never be tolerated.
2. You have no good reason to TRY and trust people that have scammed when you only need 30 people from 100s' of 1000's of members. It is insulting to the rest of the members.
3. You can not say for sure people that were once willing to scam and have crossed that threshold. Some several times ... will not choose to cross it again.

We must at some point discuss specifics which is the point at which we are assuming you will not be willing to continue because it makes you are target.

Perhaps even more dangerous than these types who don't even recognize they have done anything wrong themselves (although clear scammers and deceivers for financial reward) is a person who is for MONTHS running around the forum screaming that ANYONE selling their account is FACILITATING SCAMS and they claim this is EVIL behavior. That then decides they WILL FACILITATE SCAMMERS for payment and act in an EVIL manner. I mean if you are willing to become what you consider is EVIL for money then it would seem there is nothing they will not do for the correct amount of btc dust.


You see "minor" and being "forgiven" by a "tiny tiny tiny " subset of pals on this forum. Is not like the entire forum saying we "forgive you, you should be on our trust system, you should be paid at the highest rates for posting" I mean you could post a poll on all sections asking if these actions are "forgiven" and if they should NOT be punished and be allowed on DT whilst others perhaps say  promoting an ALT that some DT members consider "MAY" turn into a scam need to be punished with red trust.

Be careful not to conflate forgiveness from their DT pals and some on meta board with forgiveness and willingness to accept double standards from the entire board.

We did say CLEAR instances of financially motivated wrong doing. Not something semi minor like for instance sneaky racist trolling under a sock puppet for the max greedy rates he can get on his 2nd secret account before getting caught. Although demonstrates greedy, sneaky and double standards (for lecturing others on paid shitposting) is not essentially meeting the threshold of CLEAR financial danger to others. Perhaps though if this was combined with his own stated willingness to support a possible escrow scammer out of loyalty, who is also a proven scammer, supporting an auction scammer, supporting a scam facilitator etc etc ...this would start to push up toward the threshold and possibly beyond.

We need to make sure MINOR and MAJOR are the same for all members in a sensible manner.

I mean really it is insulting to the entire board that we even feel the need for ANYONE with ANY kind of financially motivated wrong doing on the trust system when we have apparently millions of members and only need 20-30 trustworthy people that are free of that type of wrong doing.

This would need be thrashed out person by person on DT.

Is knowingly supporting a proven scammer a bad thing? We think it obviously is.

2. As for theymos's part of it, he doesn't always make the 100% best actions/decisions but he did eventually blacklist lauda from DT1 right?

This is interesting really. Because after months of being presented with observable instances of lauda trust abusing punishing whistle blowers, and his prior scamming and shady shit, theymos says lauda has acted sometimes in a "sub optimal" manner but then has done some good things LOL, he does not accept the observable instances on many matters and CH is boring and acting insane,  and works out with OG vod etc that lauda has his red trust removed. I mean let us not forget lauda, tman etc were OUT of DT before theymos NEW design where they all shot back in. Let's not forget theymos made tman a merit source etc.  However sure once lauda just could not stop abusing the trust of "special members" that theymos does take some care about then he was "black listed"

But what really happened? nothing? laudas red trust abuse will remain and apparently is MORE entrenched in DT than ever before. Lauda still has a green trust sheet, lauda is still being paid at the highest rates? lauda seems fine??

theymos has time to code out a new merit = volume button for all members but can't work out that blacklisting him from DT1 did nothing so blacklisting needs to be DT all levels ? apparently he is more entrenched in DT now than ever before. Then theymos grandfathered in to the trust system the very trust abuse that brought about need of the new flagging system. Which can be abused but only to a lemons level. Still that is enough to mitigate any new strengths of the new flagging system with regard to abusing for financial reward.

theymos may have good intentions but if his systems are making things 10x worse then that makes it just as bad for the NON gang members. He does not listen nor debate. Just tried experiments on a live board? imagine devs just trying out new "ideas"  on a live project. That's what test nets are for. Whoops whats that you all lost your coins?


3.The problem is posting the same set of information, however correct or not, over and over again..

That is the very best way to get your point across. The point is in 2 parts.

1. we will not be rage quitting. It will never stop.
2. The truth where is it on topic and relevant must be heard and repeated until people accept there is no room for double standards.

We DO think you have a good point ... that we can quote or reference post where we have presented the same truths before. That would save us time and work and allow us to post on more threads.

4.I may very well be wrong but the first time I saw you here in a confrontation with "them" in meta was a thread about how all the Legendaries without any earned merit were all spammers and you were upset at being grouped in with the spammers because you didn't have any merit either.

The first contact between DT and Cryptohunter was regarding the unfair bullying of another member by DT members. Before that CH had no interest in merit, DT or even really took any real note of that kind of thing. It was after after this contact when he noticed 2 prior scam supporters were on this DT that can give weird little red marks that he started to look into this which then lead to a thread about merits.

You are possibly talking about a thread where Suchmoon made some strange and outrageous statements and refused to go back on them.


1. That ALL pre merit legends are spammers.

2. That it was WRONG and IDIOTIC to suggest that some of the 99.87 % of the board were capable of making posts as good as some of the posts made by the 0.13% of the board (which were the top 100 or 200 merit holders)

I don't recall exactly the figures but something like that.

Where she was claiming merit was such a brilliant and reliable metric when it suited her agenda... later to debunk all of that by openly stating "good poster" and " bad poster" are MEANINGLESS TERMS without definition and criteria to measure against. This is obviously correct and undeniable. Making her look INSANE or untrustworthy or very very confused.

5.I didn't really like the high merit threshold for DT votes either because of the way merit is so "top 1% ish", poor equality of distribution, and that I would also like to see lots and lots of votes for DT and a very large distributed DT network..
I would also like to see more distributed smerit distribution, like a small monthly airdrop to just about everyone, for better decentralization and less power concentration.

It's not perfect but not the worst that could have possibly happened, and who knows, my ideas could make everything worse, I'm no expert..


There is value here in what you have said. However it is the WORST thing that could have happened in that context. It bound merit to trust. So now you have 2 control systems bound together as 1. Far easier to collude and game control of both now.

That is one solution perhaps airdropped only to heros and legends since there will be enough to lose (their account)(if there is clear merit abuse to prevent them attempting it), however we far prefer to push for merit to be be attributed only to those that output posts with objective value in terms of pushing for the optimal outcome or solution to each thread. Another issue  with merit currently is someone can post something that "seems" very convincing and valuable. ONLY when it gets debunked fully at a later stage is it revealed to be misleading nonsense before that happens it gets a ton of merits. The problem seems that there is obviously a lot of back slapping and gaming and politically motivated meriting BUT ALSO there is a lot of what we consider Lemming meriting (not lemon that is the political issue) people see someone they know or like has given merits and then they think hey yeah we will give some merits too. Perhaps the merits you give should be invisible to others for 48hr or perhaps longer to allow cooling off. If people read a post and believe it deserves merit they should do so without needing confirmation from their pals.

Perhaps a limit on the merits you can give another person for 6 months say 10 merits so if you see someone with a huge merit score you don't find out it all came from the same 10-15 people and that they are all the top fans and recipients of each others merits. That 100's of people total unconnected have given merits because those posts matched the criteria of a valuable post.

Maybe merits should be merit 1 or no merit 0. I mean it is either a valuable effort or does not meet the threshold of being valuable. Perhaps 1-3 max range. With a 3 being an original and brilliant new insight that nobody has previously mentioned on that thread. Not some reworded agreement/disagreement already voiced 20x on the thread from a political POV.

I mean just ANY criteria a post should match to get merit could be useful, not just if you think it is a good post. How is that any kind of guideline. May as well say " hey if you get loads of these points you get to control the board including rev streams, who wants to give the points out oh you 20 always hanging out here in meta wanting to control things and have been willing to scam people for money in the past.., okay here you go, now only give them to others you think make good posts" bye kids be good. ahaha

6.I agree.. That just escalates..

This part is incorrect in a way. It does not escalate. Not that escalating is wrong in all cases. Those one liner meaningless off topic and derailing  do not escalate. They derail. You can't read a post presenting the truth corroborated with observable instances, not even attempt to debunk them but just scream " who made this cunt bleed" or " you are a used tampon" and say that is escalating really. That is fully on thread hijacking and derailing. There is no attempt to making a counter argument. You can call people names but you need to tackle their central points.

A debate in some forms is a battle of opinions that people need to validate and corroborate with independently verifiable evidence. This may get heated in that people may present their views in a less and less polite manner as they become more frustrated the other party can not see they are correct even given the evidence or that they are angry they are getting pushed back with this evidence and they start to realize they were WRONG.  Eventually in most cases especially those based directly on observable instances historically recorded on this forum there can only be ONE correct or ONE dominant side to a debate. Or it will become a grey area where it is so near the threshold of supporting one side over the other that the clarity is only there for those that have the capacity to interpret the information 100% accurately and measure its weight correctly. In very complex matters or where huge amounts of variables must be considered then there is perhaps only "opinions" for those with anything other than the highest capacity and specific training. In some areas there can only be educated speculations.

If a pupil says to the teacher. Can you explain why you allow lauda and his friends to steal our lunch money and try to beat us up if we dare to report it. Then lauda and his friends scream fuck off you used tampon, don't feed the troll, who made this cunt bleed. This is not escalation this is a deliberate attempt to prevent people asking legitimate questions and finding out the reasons why this abuse is allowed to continue.

Then if the pupil gets told by the teacher , shut up you boring bastard, and he makes them prefects and hands them some weapons , and the pupil asks again teacher how come you are giving these mother fucking scum bags the means to abuse in with greater effect can you explain your reasons... then lauda and his pals scream " he is the biggest troll here" " ban him"  " should be expelled from this school" "  then again this is not escalation this is compounding their earlier abuse and the teacher is making judgement errors.

When 2 sets of ideas conflict and tension escalates it is okay if the war of words each time brings some new argument and counter argument corroborated by observable events or solid evidence. When one side has reached the point of the argument where they have support enough to debunk the opposing points and the other side has NO WAY to push them back or debunk their dominating points. There there is also no need for the clearly dominant or winning side to supply A NEW argument at all. They have WON the debate until new information is presented that can debunk their points. There is no point in the losing side to escalate tension after that point. It is futile and changes nothing in terms of the debate and brings ZERO VALUE. The optimal solution or outcome at that point in time is reached.

Passion and drive are good things if people all stick to the same sensible rules.

Our central points are never trolling. How can on topic relevant truth be conflated with trolling as per the board definition. The board has quite a sensible definition of trolling that is beneficial. If you present debunked, obviously false information repeatedly you are spreading misinformation intentionally. This may not fit with "trolling" in the general sense but since that is IMPOSSIBLE to define correctly in every situation then the boards definition of trolling is very sensible.

Under that definition there are many trolls in DT.

Anyway great debate we are enjoying a sensible exchange of ideas. We believe you will be a good addition to DT. At least offering a civil back and forth of points of view.

Not that we in any way wish to say your post does not deserve the merits. We are pleased you have received them. You should also be far more valuable on DT than the vast majority of DT1 members. We don't know if already you are there.

However it is important for the reader to recognize clearly that although we have answered and offered counters to your points to the level we believe of debunking many of them (the ones we disagreed with not many of your points that are sensible and valid)  or at least pointing out they are not fully representative of the reality of the situation. Our posts have ZERO MERIT.

If you do not agree with this eddie and you believe it is unfair of us to say that. Then please point out which point of yours (the ones we underlined or even ones you think we have not addressed yet) and we will take another look and discuss this with you here. You may say that we only believe they are debunked when our argument is actually bogus. But since you have not countered we assume you are accepting our counters as valid.

That in no way means we do not believe you deserve the merits at all, you deserve them far more than 99% of people on meta. It is just an illustration of how one sided and broken the merit system is.  The truth is not valued here. It is inconvenient and shunned. Merit is the tool that will be used to silence inconvenient truths or turn down the volume soon so that you can just about hear them from page 90. You are either politically desirable or not depending on the level you support the status quo.

The reader can also witness that we are very very civil to any person that will be civil with us and not try to abuse our account or the account of our friends.  Fair is fair.

Thanks, I wasn't expecting anything like that and am almost embarrassed..


I have been contemplating my reply for a while but this part on the end seems the most troublesome..

Well, some minor, and maybe some not so minor things done in the past by some members have been forgiven by the general community and I do agree with some of these instances of forgiveness.. So you are not just going to get everyone out that has ever done anything wrong in their past ever.. It's just not going to happen..
You don't have to like all of them but you will need to get onboard with a little forgiveness especially if you expect any to be returned to you..
Some can probably be removed for some things, but not all of them for every little thing..

I would likely be more concerned about current and future poor behavior rather than past behavior..
Watch for current and new things.. The past is mostly settled already wither you agree with what the outcome was or not..

For all I know you are right about the DRK instamine situation..
Lauda probably just gave you a red tag for the best excuse to red tag you that lauda could think up.. I don't really agree with it.. Me and lauda don't agree often..

As for theymos's part of it, he doesn't always make the 100% best actions/decisions but he did eventually blacklist lauda from DT1 right?

I don't like people digging histories to get others banned..

I don't think you are a "troll" by my definition of a troll.. I doubt you are doing this just to amuse yourself..

Maybe "hot head" isn't the best word but yeah you get angry..
The problem is posting the same set of information, however correct or not, over and over again..
Maybe you should start a reputation thread to collect all of your points about every "scammer" user into the OP in sections of user or system and why you disagree with it, and then link it to your signature, so you can just say "see section "Merit" at the link in my signature" or "see section "Suchmoon" at the link in my signature", so you don't have to say it over every time..

I may very well be wrong but the first time I saw you here in a confrontation with "them" in meta was a thread about how all the Legendaries without any earned merit were all spammers and you were upset at being grouped in with the spammers because you didn't have any merit either..
I didn't really like the high merit threshold for DT votes either because of the way merit is so "top 1% ish", poor equality of distribution, and that I would also like to see lots and lots of votes for DT and a very large distributed DT network..
I would also like to see more distributed smerit distribution, like a small monthly airdrop to just about everyone, for better decentralization and less power concentration.

It's not perfect but not the worst that could have possibly happened, and who knows, my ideas could make everything worse, I'm no expert..

Quote from: The-One-Above-All on September 14, 2019, 09:43:20 AM

Just screaming accusations like " trolling don't feed them" or " who made this cunt bleed" " or shut up you used tampon" " who made this cunts butt sore"  these kind of things are very low value

I agree.. That just escalates..


Maybe the point is not to post your same old points continually..
Post new points you come up with.. Post new ideas you think of like suggestions for the forums various systems.. Post new things you notice and would like to point out to all of us. Post some fresh material and be constructive with it.. Comment your thoughts on things and have new conversations..
If you feel the need to explain something that you have already explained 50 times then maybe you need to come up with a way to reference it and not type it every time so you can be a little more succinct..

I'm not the greatest at being succinct all the time either though but I try not to say the same thing 5 different ways..

Please read more carefully vixen. Start with just reading this entire thread.

CENTRALIZING POWER. Power does not reside with DT. DT is merely a tumor that is a result of the true CANCER merit.

Merit directly controls members in the ways 1-10 we have specified.

Besides which even taking into consideration DT alone. We and any other member would certain benefit far more greatly from top down controlled fair and transparent rules. That are applied equally to all members. rather than this faux decentralized (to a group that collude as one on many important and dangerous issues)  that have no accountability except to themselves in many cases.    


MORE INTERESTINGLY

You claim Tecshare should be blacklisted from DT do you vixen? this is a view we do not share nor understand at this stage.

Could you explain your reasoning on this in the full context of your reasoning that those with objectively verifiable observable instances of financial wrong doing and in some cases outright undeniable scamming and self confessed willing to facilitate scammers for a price.

We are looking forward to you not running away and staying here to thrash this out. We want to give you every opportunity to present your reasoning and we will work with you to reach the objective and optimal decision.

So lets compare the reasons you want techshare, but not lauda, tman, nutildah  blacklisted. Rather you want lauda tman and nutildah included into a trust system?

This is going to be interesting.. or will we witness a high velocity vile vixen vanishing act?

To summon the agent one it seems need only mention 'vixen' and it appears to assist as best it can.

Oh, all right, if you insist...

---

False. DT was previously decided by theymos unilaterally. The new system, however much you dislike it, is decentralised by comparison.

Okay, here you're onto something. I don't know why TECSHARE hasn't yet been blacklisted from DT any more than you do. My best guess is that theymos is waiting to see if the system will resolve itself in a decentralised way.

Penmanship counts. You'd do well to heed Strunk & White's advice to omit needless words (or just omit words).

As much as we would (not) love a big bag of subjective worthless magic points we are not going anywhere until the new merit = volume button is switched on in meta. Then new strategies will need be formed.

In a real merits system it is not subjectively given. It is objectively earned. When that happens we shall have more merits than we could deal with.

I know regular truth injections to the back slapping echo chambers (meta threads) are inconvenient and annoying. Sadly for historical purposes they should be there as testament to the warnings that were issued early on, regarding this merit cancer/faux decentralization nonsense.

Why not just debunk the points we are making and then they can REALLY be termed as trolling if repeated then for REALLY trolling repeatedly.

Still the central points remain solid with no real attempt at debunking them. More if we are all honest a case of ... well okay they may be true, but perhaps you are exaggerating them. NO they are true, there is no exaggeration at all.

If other members and mods want to side with scammers and trust abusers to ensure their chipmixer btc dust payments, then that will be there in history for all to read about.
It is there in black and white and undeniable as are most of our central points, hence why NONE of them have been debunked. You can not debunk a observable instance. Well perhaps one vixen could......in their mind anyway.

You forgot something...


This will be the best for you... And also take this offer already, then everybody who treated you bad might also have a change of pace. Admin might also want to engage with it, possibility aren't still zero, I suppose?

---

I might want to believe in eddie13 here,...

Count me in on this, only if you'll accept what eddie13's suggestion.

12

Theymos signature is attached in there, you can verify that. Mata ne!

Congratulations on hitting legendary.
We are pleased you gained a nice bunch of merits. The post is more deserving than most here. However, we must still demonstrate vast swathes of it are incorrect or very misleading. This is not personal.

It is good to actually meet a member that is not afraid to debate in public. Even if we believe you are not presenting a picture that is really representative of the reality here. However that is what debates are for. So we look forward to it's continuation. So far it has served you well.

We believe you are being honest. However please review all the information and verify it for yourself. Then query any points you disagree with.


1.A lot of these "scammers", or whatever you call them, in DT and sources are not as bad as you think they are.. Sure they have their imperfections but you have an inflated view of their negativity due to your specific personal dealings with them

We would need specific examples of those we refer to correctly as scammers. We say correctly since they have observable instances of scamming in their histories. Others have other financially motivated wrong doing or clearly support those that do. Many DT members (suchmoon for sure) claim that if you are supporting even a possible scam then you can be viewed as a scammer. In most of DT's cases they are supporting known and documented scammers or those willing to facilitate scamming for a price.

Bring your examples of where we are being over harsh. I think you will find calling scammers " scammers" or scammer supporters " scam supporters" will be acceptable practice from and objective standpoint. Some have MULTIPLE instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their pasts.


2. Flying off the handle and going looney

If you examine carefully the time line of CH. The "looney" or getting annoyed is fully warranted if you examine the depth and severity of the injustice. Just a quick recap.

1. lauda lying and scamming accusing CH of being a liar and there was no premine/instamine because lauda was on the launch and could say that for sure. (and held bags of that specific coin.)
2. Lauda's lies debunked by CH and others who supported CH's claims.
3. CH pushes with others for devs to offer a $ 2 000 000 000 compensation offer for the entire board, that lauda sought to prevent.
4. Years later CH catches lauda being very negative about that premined project claiming it is (centralized - go figure when they premine all the minting), lauda says " yeah sorry I was new and foolish. CH graciously says.. okay never too late to come to the light.
5. Lauda appears years later accusing CH of being liar on a separate issue. CH challenges him to present the lies. Lauda refuses but continues to make false allegations.
6. CH says if you make those claims again without presenting evidence he will encourage others to review laudas post history for themselves.
7. Lauda gives a scam tag to CH for saying that.
8. CH presents observable events from laudas history. Tman (also an auction scammer and implicated working with lauda on an extortion plot) gives CH another red tag.
9. CH says to tman you can not give red tags for presenting facts. Tman says " I can, I will and I just have".
10. CH says remove the red tag or else I will make sure everyone knows the truth about this trust abuse.
11. Yogg (also involved with lauda and tman previously) gives CH a red tag. Claiming that if " you say you will inform others of why you got the trust abuse if it is not removed that means you need a scam tag.
12. CH presents this to several DT members. He gets replies like. " I am not interested in reviewing this"  " I don't want to get involved" " I am not interested in the truth" " It is a good thing when innocent people get red trust because it makes everyone more wary"
13. Theymos says - your posts are annoying long winded low value garbage.  Lauda has done some good things before. I don't accept your explanation. NO debate.
14. People use Theymos reply as validation that CH is the problem not the systems of control and the fact DT will not act against each other and collude.
15. Ch presents a brilliant thread that is never debunked detailing the undeniable flaws of the sytems of control and their dire implications and makes some good suggestions with the key one to keep merit and trust as separated as possible. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-most-important-thread-you-can-contribute-to-this-yearno-kidding-5088852
16. Theymos merits the faux rebuttal that CH debunked and then goes and binds merit and trust together essentially making "merit into trust"
17. Theymos then makes a deal with OG and lauda to remove Laudas scam tags so that he can be seen as one of the most trustworthy people on the board.
18. Theymos says ..."ch you may have had a point about your trust abuse but because for some UNKNOWN reason completely unfathomable after compounded abuse of your account by the same scammers and his friends that tried to scam the board out of a 2 000 000 000 usd compensation offer over months, my own reluctance to help (but I will help the scammer get his red trust removed) DT's all colluding and telling you it is good innocent members get red, and the truth is not of interest.  Then just for that you get all angry and agressive. The only explanation could be you are clearly insane.
19. After suchmoon tries to spin that fighting for a 2 000 000 000 USD compensation claim and winning it against her scammer pal is net negative because ch didn't a few times reference the post which provided CH with the first clear analysis and details of how the premine went down. Although many times of the 10's of times it was quoted he did that winning a 2 000 000 000 usd compensation offer against her scammer pal means CH should be perm banned.
20. Then more weaponizing of gamed metrics like deleted post count. Theymos says CH you will be banned soon because you have a lot of deleted posts.
21 What happens next? someone goes and reports every single short post 2 words or whatever in CH entire history LOL
22. Voted the biggest TROLL on this board. According to the board rules. Trolling is the continued posting of clearly debunked and false information. The people voting can not present 1 instance where this took place? strange isn't it.



So eddie you say CH is a hot head? unreasonable and seemingly gets angry above and beyond normal range for these small injustices at the hands of previously defeated scammers and their colluding supporters? now entrenching themselves deeply in power and ensure they are paid at the highest rates due to Theymos brilliant designs?

We CH/ us and other truth presenters are too negative you say? these people are just the types you want in positions of trust you say? We just need to get to know them a little more and make friends?

3.You shouldn't have been so pissed about not having merits and just understood that the merit system just sucked for you

Merit was never the original reason for our arrival on meta board. It is also untrue that in its current form we desire merit since we want the entire system deleted or confined to its original purpose that had no conceivable use for us.

This is kind of a strange statement. It is clear merit sucks for the myriad of reasons we have demonstrated it sucks for. This has implications for the entire board.

We don't give one shit about this merit dirt if it was left to hold out bots ONLY as it was designed. However when it  empowers, sanctions, and financially REWARDS abuse like the above ...none of which is accountable to any member except themselves. Then Yes we are more interested in seeing it adapted so this does not happen to ANY member. Our only point is that it is the prime tool for creating a 2 tier system, which closely represents the central banking system and is nothing like the principles satoshi envisioned.
The implications for free speech on equal terms just got a whole lot clearer with the new merit = volume of your voice tweak.

Please review our post history and this thread (which was pre merit=trust) to understand merit is grossly net negative.  https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-most-important-thread-you-can-contribute-to-this-yearno-kidding-5088852
Since then things have gotten an whole lot more dark in many key areas that satoshi would have fought to protect. It is simply a case of understanding the implications of these control systems.

4. What are you going to do now? What is the next step from here?
Their really aren't many ways left that you can reword your points and arguments you have posted hundreds of times. We have all read them and know what you have to say including theymos.. You aren't really helping yourself with your ranting extremely long posts about the same thing over and over again. You aren't helping yourself by calling them "scammers" and all sorts of names and completely burning every bridge to nothing but dust. (I know they call you names but be the bigger man and don't return the jab, namecalling makes everyone look foolish imo)

There is no requirement to reword the truth. When the truth is on topic and relevant then the truth shall be presented. It shall not be repackaged.

Scammers will be called scammers. There is no need to mislead people regarding their potential and already observed behaviors.  Name calling is fine if the names can be sensibly tied to the observable behaviors of the person. So calling someone a filthy scamming scum bag is reasonable and then to tie the relevance of this and their prior actions to the opening post is useful to the reader. We have no issue with names in our direction if the supporting argument is there to justify it.

So for instance.

" who made this cunt bleed"  is just silly and derailing low value garbage. That was marked BAD when we reported it.

rather

" You are a cunt, I hate you. You continuously bring up my scamming past to demonstrate that I have double standards for being negative about other members for lesser crimes, I would like to make your nose bleed you fucking stalking bitch"

There you see we would not object. Although the scammers frustration has caused them to claim they would like make our nose bleed. We would say to ourselves. He has explained and validated his outburts and name calling. The reader can now see that the scammer is trying to pull double standards and punish another member for things he himself has done. We will keep this in mind when forming our own conclusions in the full context of this situation.

There is a correct term that describes the persons behaviors that is just called describing correctly. There is swearing and attributing negative terms to a person and justifying your reasons with corroborating evidence in the context of the OP. That is fine too. Just screaming accusations like " trolling don't feed them" or " who made this cunt bleed" " or shut up you used tampon" " who made this cunts butt sore"  these kind of things are very low value and need to be validated and credible and also relate to the OP directly.


5.Give in just a bit and think about what you would accept as far as a mutual disagreement. What would be acceptable to you to establish atleast a wee bit of mutual respect.
Calm down, come back and put your cards on the table, and work towards some sort of peace agreement?

This would not be possible really without some serious adjustments. However to out line them as a kind of rough idea.

1. ALL members with ANY clear financially motivated wrong doing removed from positions of trust at ANY time now or the future.
2. Those supporting or not excluding members that match that description ALSO REMOVED.
2. All trust abuse removed from our account and any other person clearly being abused who has ZERO instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their histories.

That would certainly help put us towards much much less frequent truth presentation regarding matters of TRUST, scamming, etc. That side of things would be of little interest after that point.

We would also like help develop a  sensible and logical set of criteria that helps all members measure the objective value of a post (and many other measures to turn merit into something that resembles merit) and a set of sensible and logical criteria, examples etc of permitted flow.  This need not be negative and would only be viewed as such by those that want to maintain the status quo and abuse of the merit system. Those that want FAIR and TRANSPARENT allocation of merit will be more than happy to assist a system that pushes for that.


Thanks for this opportunity to have a sensible, cordial and civil debate.

@ hilarious you post is OBSERVABLY incorrect garbage and totally misleading to what we have said. Please review it, review our posts and amend else we will need to crush your claims as deliberately misleading and false rubbish.

@trannydung

Great dung post.


@mprep

as previously explained. PM's are not suitable for a transparent debate on issues that have implications for the entire board. Also even posting PM's is frowned on so that would not be at all useful in terms of relaying theymos words to the forum at any stage.

@the rest

not time for the bottom of the barrel right now.

This is not the first thread with local rule for only theymos. I guess admin likely blocked OP's PM for months.
By the way, the thread looks like a merit-laundering place for merit sources (just kidding).  

Sane person:

homophobia: bad
racism: equally as bad

Insane person:

homophobia + violence: bad
'racist' joke account + signature campaign: worst crime on the forum.


Exactly, but that would defeat the entire purpose of him making these threads in the first place. He does them for attention, so if theymos ignores his PM, which he likely will, then he's just screaming into the void.  

My offer is still on the table: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50822867

I don't even care about respect towards me as long as cryptohunter can respect the forum as a whole and stop spamming this mindless rage all over the place. One thread to vent it all sounds like a fair deal and I'd do my best to engage him and encourage others to do so in such a dedicated thread.

In regards to the local rule, I'm going to quote something I've posted previously that is surprisingly perfect for this topic:

You deserved +35 for this. (Currently out, so I hope some one will)
Very well said.


P.S. This was the first time I read a Long context of somebody.

A lot of these "scammers", or whatever you call them, in DT and sources are not as bad as you think they are.. Sure they have their imperfections but you have an inflated view of their negativity due to your specific personal dealings with them..

The problem is that you (mostly) are all hotheads, condescending, and egotistical, but their are 20 of them and one of you.. Including you with your "real legend" shit and you flying off the handle, and them calling you a cunt, giving no respect to what you had to say, and disregarding you as a loon, but your flying off the handle did get increasingly looney along with their disrespect of you, to the point where we are today..

Sure they treated you poorly but you also handled it poorly by flying off the handle about it and went straight to war against them all before you got the chance to build any semblance of mutual respect with them.
I wish things didn't turn out this way and feel sorry for you in your situation but it's like the concept of deescalation has never even crossed you mind right from the start when this battle started about you being a Legend but having no merits..

Yes their are a lot of Legendarys with no merits because they are shit spammers and their are also Legendarys with no merits because the merit system sucks or is "sub-optimal" in areas of the forum, like the altcoins board where you came from, especially back then when your war started..

You shouldn't have been so pissed about not having merits and just understood that the merit system just sucked for you. They shouldn't have been so dismissive of you and had some understanding that the merit system sucked for you. You shouldn't have been so quick to escalate and go to war. Everyone should have been less offensive. They shouldn't have tried digging to ban you. You should have kept your cool better and maybe just stepped away to prove them wrong with your actions rather than arguments.. They shouldn't have called you names.. You shouldn't have called them names..
Now you are at total war..

You have some supportable points and grievances but you package it in an unsupportable way.. I'd bet that theymos even feels for some of your points but he ain't got time for the rest of the package it comes in and we just can't support your position that they are all absolute scammers..

Heck yes some of them have way too many merits, and power that comes with merits, but for the most part that wasn't intentional, it's just the way the cards landed, and were just trying to play the game the best we can with the cards we were dealt..
Yeah you got dealt a shit hand but life isn't fair..

I got dealt a shit hand too, being 1 post for an activity period away from having my 1000 base merits, and I thought it really sucked at first, but now I think it's kinda cool because I'll have the opportunity to atleast earn 1 rank, it wasn't just handed to me, it gives me a bit of incentive and something to look forward to, but it's not like it matters anyway because their hasn't been a signature campaign deal that works for me in a long time anyway and I'm not petty/shallow about wanting to be a legendary, I'm no where near "legendary" in reality..


What are you going to do now? What is the next step from here?
Their really aren't many ways left that you can reword your points and arguments you have posted hundreds of times. We have all read them and know what you have to say including theymos.. You aren't really helping yourself with your ranting extremely long posts about the same thing over and over again. You aren't helping yourself by calling them "scammers" and all sorts of names and completely burning every bridge to nothing but dust. (I know they call you names but be the bigger man and don't return the jab, namecalling makes everyone look foolish imo)

I'd hate to see you just keep this up until you finally ragequit.. I don't want to see you gone because I think you can be productive. You have a lot of valuable oldschool crypto experience and know things from the past that not many do. Far more than me..


Can you maybe take a break from this war for a bit? Maybe go back to the altcoins board for a month or 2, think, and come up with a plan to end this? Maybe some sort of south/north korea ceasefire for now while you come up with a plan?

Give in just a bit and think about what you would accept as far as a mutual disagreement. What would be acceptable to you to establish atleast a wee bit of mutual respect.
Calm down, come back and put your cards on the table, and work towards some sort of peace agreement?
Maybe I can even help you talk to them..

If you can pull it off I'll give you a bunch of stupid merits..

Poor old robovac aka the merit obsessed dirt sucking tool.  Who has achieved NOTHING or real note since being a member here. NO achievements at ALL except spewing meaningless stats obsessed garbage and supporting anything that makes it appear a credible and important member even if that ALSO supports scammers and those observably directly a financial risk to the board.


10000 posts and NOT 1 real achievement. LOL brilliant robovac. Meanwhile Lauda has come over to theymos to demonstrate how himself and robovac work as a team to keep the truly dangerous in line.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIblMtZ0EYk&t=7s


Loyce and lauda explaining how it should be 250 earned merits or higher to Theymos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbuaUYMwOP8&t=19s



I mean look robovac you merit pumped dreg. Bring me here 5 of your ORIGINAL THOUGHT INSPIRING POSTS (not copy and past stats puke with very minor analysis) for analysis. Also since you are obsessed with a prior REAL LEGEND WITH MULTIPLE EXAMPLES OF REAL ACHIEVEMENTS and since you like to argue with him previously. Bring here some EXAMPLES of your encounters where you were not demonstrated to be a dumb fool and spout moronic illogical junk?

Now get back to sucking up dirt and spewing out "stats" based upon a meaningless subjective metric. That is ALL you are "good for".

You even selectively quote theymos replies to a true legend that DO NOT INCLUDE his observably incorrect statements. Bring all the quotes. Also those quote demonstrate. 1 I will ignore and not tackle - then it followed some observably incorrect statements. One of which seems to have been self debunked by his own subsequent actions. 1 false accusation and refusal to then tackle permitted flow. Of course this varies depending on who you are.

In addition to that the "good" reports are a LAUGHING STOCK. BAD reports and GOOD reports are subjective and in many cases observably gamed and bogus decisions by corrupt mods.

Have a look on our "deleted posts" topic in rep and then we will compare those to some that are marked BAD from the DT abusers and merit cyclers like random spams like the one from oeioeie (or whatever that dreg calls himself)  

" who made this cunt bleed"

" shut up you used tampon"

these are now the good posts and credible and undenible rebuttals to their " central points" are off topic and irrelevent.

I know you are just low level Absolute Imbecile and pathetic robovac but there is no point in quoting FALSE accusations that collapse under scrutiny to try to prove whatever garbage you are spouting out now.

So again your misleading post is served up as garbage.

Stick to serving the "gang" members and trying to validate your "value" here by just slobbering out stats based upon meaningless metrics. If you create enough of those then you are doing the best that you are capable of.  You are an idiot I hope that you realize this clearly. If not go back review the merit cycling threads where your stupid attempts at reason were torn to bits by a real legend.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now at to eddies post ( the only semi credible attempt at a debate although he is not theymos himself so should not be posting under our local rules)


Still since this is the ONLY kind of ATTEMPT at a debate we are likely to encounter between Theymos hiding up and the merit cycling crew trying to derail. We willl tackle his points one by one.


Let's start.

1. OP have you ever seen any system work out 100% optimally in absolutely every aspect?

that is no excuse to have a system that is almost as SUB OPTIMAL as you could dream up.

Review these points we presented that are based upon a meaningless and misleading metric

1. rank
2. other peoples paid2post eligibility
3. other peoples paid2post rates
4. the volume of the entire board in that now you your voice will not be heard at all unless you have a nice amount of EARNED merits.
5. their own personal access to the highest rates of paid2post
6. The trust system eligibility and selection process (what a shock they all feel EACH OTHER are the most trustworthy even though many are PROVEN scammers and financially dangerous.
7. The perceived trust of other members and themselves.
8. Therefore other peoples ability to trade on this board.
9. Peoples (public opinions) via wanting to obtain merits and not get red trust.
10. Idiots perceived opinions since they look at merit score as some kind of validation of true value.

So the people that now have vast control of ALL of these things happen to ALSO be the same people that are listed here on the dirty turds poll.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poll-the-official-dirty-turds-poll-which-dt-needs-flushing-first-5170789

You start to realize the "nothing is 100% perfect argument" is kind of funny.

2. The goal of the merit system is to slow down sig spammers and account farmers

This is CORRECT and 100% ALL it was designed for. Applying NEW meanings to it like,

To then say if you have the most merits you get to control  1-10 above is PURE IDIOCY.

There is no real way to abuse merit UNLESS those with the most merit say it is being abused = PURE IDIOCY.

3.The DT system's goal is decentralization and the casualty is drama and infighting and also the disadvantage of users the merit system is sub-optimal for.. I still think it will settle out, and is settling out, but the waves are still bouncing around in the pool from the cannonball that was thrown in when it was implemented..
A subset of users got a big head start because they were already using trust lists and were some of the first to act because they are most on top of new happenings.. Maybe they have been trying to keep it a bit too exclusive to like minded users and supporters but it is continually decentralizing and diversifying to many users of many mindsets..


It is NOT decentralization. If so the designer is a total and utter imbecile. MERIT is the controlling factor of the power the members will have themselves, AND the power to select who else has access to that power. NOW due to the design there is CLEAR FINANCIAL REWARD via sig campaigns, bumps, and multiple other direct financial incentives to retaining that POWER and ensuring that POWER only goes to those that will not clearly rival their power or financial advantages. AND YOU HOPE THING WILL IMPROVE AND THIS WAS JUST A HEAD START??   this is observably FALSE.  You are claiming that human nature on this board works in reverse to EVERY SINGLE EXAMPLE OF HUMAN NATURE in history??  

You also seem to be ignoring the FACT that these people you think will suddenly start allowing "others" outside of their pals, alts and acolytes to gain some power were really lovely people to start with. Not noticing most of them are either proven to have scammed, or supported others that have scammed here.

This point is BOGUS that things will improve. It is impossible to say that will happen.

THE BEST you can HOPE will happen is that DT will break down in to FACTIONS that will not abuse each other due to MAD.  

The more you present observable instances of the failure of the merit system and the direct knock on results of the merit system. The MORE theymos sets up the board to financially reward and skew power based on MERIT.

It is clearly impossible he can not notice the direct results of this but seems now complicit to ensure the entire board (before this latest stupid move with merit = bump power the merit cancer was spreading its effect slightly more slowly) only serves to represent the opinions and financially rewarding results of the merit hoarders.

Your 3rd point here is in part TRUE but is stating the situation as it is now in very weak terms and exposing the reader to unrealistic hopes for an improvement in terms of fair treatment for all members.

Merit needs resetting, and some strict enforceable criteria set. Abusers are booted off AT ONCE. I mean look at theymos actions on this so far. HE REMOVED a merit source for openly saying I WILL REWARD GOOD POSTS THAT FIT WITH WHAT I AGREE WITH (POLITICAL POINTS) however we can NOT demonstrate those posts were net negative and actually some of those posts were EXCELLENT and their central points were never debunked.

Then THEYMOS gives merit source to people who SLATHER merits on politically contrived net negative and at times rule breaking garbage like fox poop.

The entire system is bogus and THEYMOS is now ADDING MORE additional financial rewards for an observably broken and misleading metric.

The most worrying thing is the free speech. It is undeniable that Theymos is ever more making the carrot more tasty and appealing (like crack now)  although has apparently attempted to lessen the blatant abuse of the stick (trust) to forcing people to repeat and regurgitate the " VIEWS" of the system controllers.  

I mean the flagging system is a GOOD IDEA but again VERY WEAK implementation so that you still get flagrant abuse of the old trust system which is left there for the system controllers and their scampaign manager friends to game for their own closed selection process.

The entire attempt at decentralizing control has FAILED.

It was better when theymos chose some DT members so he was directly accountable for enlisting scammers and trust abusers.

We have given him MANY great suggestions to curb the control by a tiny sub set of scammers and their supporters and each time he refuses.

Unless he can debate openly regarding the potential pros and cons of his decisions then he must be viewed as unsuitable to concoct these ludicrous systems that place scammers in the most lucrative and powerful positions of the board where they are accountable only to themselves in any meaningful way.

Whether it is deliberate or not this building upon this "merit" garbage is a FAIL in numerous ways.  

This is NOT the governance of someone suitable for satoshis principles.  Let's bring in some one sensible who has some understanding of human nature and can perhaps create something more credible that REALLY decentralizes power and does not just hand it immediately to the most greedy and dangerous members.

Let theymos be the warden but ffs let's get some developer who can create some systems that are not immediately gamed and manipulated by a few scammers and their pals. who then use their new given powers to take all the best rev streams and silence all those that dare to notice.

Is it impossible on a anonymous forum? perhaps it is so let's forget the FAKE DECENTRALIZATION and bring on some top down control that is FULLY ACCOUNTABLE.


So yes there was some value to your post eddie, however under scrutiny it falls very short of painting a true representation of what we have here right now and the outlook for this system in the future.

Next please.


@suchmoon you can not crush central points by ignoring them. Sorry try again. Bring your best arguments. We always enjoy humiliating you in public.

Theymos has only replied to us and our friends in MOSTLY 1 liner, poorly researched, observably untrue accusations and statements. Mixed with some subjective opinions.

We want a REAL DEBATE.

Unlike you suchmoon we do not kiss theymos ass then stab him in the back as soon as he take some small action against your scamming, trust abusing pals.

We tell theymos the TRUTH.

Merit is dog shit. You must have rocks in your head building control systems upon this gamed and manipulated garbage. You should be taking some REAL action against scammers infesting your trust system, you should not be giving merit source to scammers and shit posters, your mods are corrupt and will not dare debate their actions, the financial incentives you are providing for gaming your systems are foolish,

Stop weighting merit as if it is MERIT and start cleaning house of scammers and their supporters.


Suchmoon only calls theymos out as a sneaky heavy handed leader FOR ASKING SCAMMERS GET REMOVED.

Notice the difference??? theymos probably does not because he thinks suchmoon is an excellent member LOL


Sorry no debunking of the central points as yet. Keep them coming though. More screaming trolling for merits is appreciated for bumps.

Or

RUN OFF AND HIDE weasels.

Your central points (as well as outer, minor, and peripheral ones) have been crushed numerous times by theymos thoroughly ignoring you. I wish we could all do the same but we're weak and addicted to drama.

Then why bother starting a thread at all? Is theymos blocking your PMs?

OP have you ever seen any system work out 100% optimally in absolutely every aspect?

No.. They are about compromise to achieve a goal.. Even Bitcoin is far from optimal relating to TX throughput and energy consumption, but is the best system yet to achieve the goal and is this way to achieve the goals of decentralization and security..

The goal of the merit system is to slow down sig spammers and account farmers.. It is working but their are casualties where it is not 100% optimal for all users.. It is sub-optimal for many average users and over-optimal for the top users..

The DT system's goal is decentralization and the casualty is drama and infighting and also the disadvantage of users the merit system is sub-optimal for.. I still think it will settle out, and is settling out, but the waves are still bouncing around in the pool from the cannonball that was thrown in when it was implemented..
A subset of users got a big head start because they were already using trust lists and were some of the first to act because they are most on top of new happenings.. Maybe they have been trying to keep it a bit too exclusive to like minded users and supporters but it is continually decentralizing and diversifying to many users of many mindsets..

The bumping system now is a bit centralized to the favor of users who are in the over-optimal camp of the merit system but it is still pretty good.. The goal of cleaning up the scamcoin boards is probably going to work pretty good but at the slight casualty of users in the sub-optimal merit camp..
Atleast it has a cap of the last years activity so LoyceV's posts don't bump threads straight to the front page of the New York Times right?

Life isn't fair.. Perfection is a fairytale..

Cryptohunter vs theymos, always a good read whenever theymos engages:

Sue me!

---

---

Wow this is Legendary, my 10000^th post