In the abstract, I look much more seriously upon frivolous
positive feedback than upon questionable negatives. You will notice that I have
never yet left a positive for anybody, ever. (I have been intending one for Lauda; perhaps I may consider a few others after that.) I am liberal with negatives, and conservative with positives; for I distrust easily, but I am careful in choosing whom I trust.
This counter nonsense probably doesn't mean shit in the new trust system
Hello, you sound almost like me. :-)
but I countered the rating nonetheless
Hey, I said, “No backsies!” I despise this childish game of the counter to the counter to the counter.
Because it explicitly is a “counter”, I will remove my “counter” if figmentofmyass, eddie13, and BayAreaCoins all remove their positive “counters”—and not otherwise. However, this will not stop the potential that now that I am examining TECSHARE, I may independently add my own negative feedback at some point; and such a thing would absolutely and unarguably stay put until either hell freezes over, or I mine a Bitcoin block on my Raspberry Pi. Perhaps longer.
and will exclude nullius if that red trust remains.
Will you also do ~figmentofmyass and ~eddie13? My feedback was a “counter” to their frivolous positive “counter” feedback. It is negative, in support of Vod’s and Lauda’s negatives.
Moreover, will you ~Vod for the negative feedback that I am supporting? I notice that you include Vod, and you are not demanding that he remove his eminently reasonable negative feedback that you are now counter-counter-countering.
(You already ~BayAreaCoins, so it is moot here.)
FYI, I left this feedback after Vod’s reference link led me to
nutildah’s post on DT manipulation by
TECSHARE and
Kalemder, a Turkish local member whom I am investigating. At the same time as I tagged TECSHARE, I tagged Kalemder based on nutildah’s post plus evidence that I will not yet disclose publicly. Thanks, Vod! Lauda’s was less useful, but only because I had already figured out for myself most of what it said.
Vod’s tip on nutildah’s post leaves me shrugging at TECSHARE’s accusations against me. A DT manipulator tries to manipulate others into ~nullius by accusing me of his own guilt of trust system abuse?
Quelle surprise.As much as I disagree with you [TECSHARE] on almost everything, I don't think you're "high-risk" to trade with.
The trust system has evolved to become much more than that, as you well know.
Most of my positives (including one from a moderator) are for my technical expertise, such that people who read my technical posts should know whether I know whereof I speak, or I am just spouting Internet faux-expert techno-gibberish.
I myself have been saved numerous times by negatives and informational feedback discovered through the trust system. The forum is a dangerous place, in a good way, because freedom is dangerous: People need to take responsibility for their own decisions; and they need such reputational information available to them as is necessary for the exercise of wise judgment. Aside, reputational systems are a major interest of mine; and I have had some thoughts on how to improve the trust system into a cypherpunks-style cryptographic, decentralized reputational system like a PGP WoT that actually works.
With so many scammers, trolls, sockpuppets, and other miscreants hereabouts, I would not feel comfortable even
posting here without the trust system. Before I apply significant merit to a post, I check the trust system. Before I praise someone in public, I check the trust system. It’s not perfect; and as you know (
cough), I have nearly suffered disaster due to my own foolishly excessive reliance on a single positive trust feedback from a very trustworthy person.
Cf. what I said above about my conservatism in positive feedback: A mistaken positive can be
far more harmful than an erroneous negative!
Please ~nullius as they have no idea how the trust system should be used and are clearly just being used to game the system with alts.
(1) You, who
game the trust system, accuse your accuser of your own wrongs? That is exactly the type of dishonest behaviour that
will earn a non-“counter” negative feedback from me—on grounds similar to Vod’s, but independently of him. One which will stay permanently.
(2) Any evidence about “alts”, or are you descending to the level of a garden-variety whiner full of “conspiracy theories”? I have been frequently accused of being both Lauda and Satoshi, and less-frequently accused of being about a half-dozen others.
Yawn.Note: I will not waste my time arguing with your nonsense, other than if you have substantial evidence on point (2).