Topic: Trust system abuse, i bought this account because the rules allow it. (Read 887 times)

Forum rules and trust system are two different things and this is proved by the fact that accounts which are bought and sold haven't been banned. DT trust is a totally different thing and they don't want users to sell their reputation for few bucks as this encourages scamming. Selling your account is as good as selling your ID proof and letting it be used for illegal purposes.

In the foru^m rules, scammⁱng and po^nzi/H^YI^P sch^eme^{s a}re also a^llowe^d.

Till now I didn't know if selling account is allowed here. But it looks like it is allowed. But it is clearly mentioned.
So why you decided to buy an account?

Giving such excuses will not work here. Everyone has the almost the same problem and if everyone starts giving the same excuse and starts buying the account then this forum will be nothing else than HELL.

You should talk with Steamtyme first if you have a proper explanation then I think he may remove Negative rating and Put Neutral rating.

---

And your life is not over just because someone tagged you with Negative ratings. There were few sign campaigns which allow users with Negative ratings.

You do not really care about any of that do you mikeywith?  else you would be upholding your strict standards equally to all members?

Is an observable liar and scammer trustworthy? NO.  But we do not witness you doing anything about it other than telling people to stop going on about it all and just let it slide under the carpet. Stop fighting them you say. Just let them get away with it. You seem to only stand up to people you perceive to have less power than you. That is weak.

What about when you said if anyone had advertised their account for sale they would be red tagged. Then you went back on it, and did not tag them when evidence was presented. This person even said in 2014 account sales are EVIL and that they are deliberately enabling scammers to scam. Then decided to sell their own account in 2016 not giving one shit about that.  This person is far worse that the person you are arguing with now. Double standards.

This time limit bullshit does not stand. If you are untrustworthy you are untrustworthy. By his own admission no less. I say admission he was demanding others were EVIL for doing the same as he went and done. What do you make of that??

Start letting us witness some of your "words" in "actions" because as yet you are appearing almost untrustworthy. If we can not believe you will take the actions you are advocating then why should we believe anything that you say?

You want to appear honest and just. However, we can observe those are just words. Your actions do not follow that which you state.

Think on this and make some changes. I understand you are afraid of some other DT and merit source gang members but you need not be. Their time is coming to an end.

i am trying to find a proper explanation that fits in your IQ level but i can't find any, building your own reputation vs buying someone else's are two completely different things,  the second one means one of two things.

1- you got caught with your pants down trying to scam someone using your original account which is now useless and/or simply want to hide your scammy attitude behind a more trustworthy account.

2- you are simply a "lazy piece of shit" who wants to buy success rather than earning it

if it's the first one, then you deserve the tag, if it's the second one, then it only makes you an unfortunate "lazy piece of shit"

buying someone else's identity is malicious, it's like using someone else's passport or ID, if you think that is fine in terms of trustworthiness then you should see a doctor.

What nonsense are you talking about ?

You don't need to be a clairvoyant when seeing somebody scammed somebody else to know he is a scammer.
Also there are no campaigns which allow scams.The dumbest what i ever heard.

In your theory we should ban all members of bitcointalk since everyone of them owns an account which they could use to scam somebody else.
We ban all members from bitcointalk to prevent scams from bitcointalk.

Some campaigns don't prohibit scam as well, in fact the forum itself doesn't, you can scam a 100 people and prove it, and probably non of the mods will take actions against you, so based on your theory proven scammers should not be tagged as well.

Some campaigns allow alts so why would it be instantly called scam ?Are you a clairvoyant ?

in many countries, carrying a knife around the park does not go against the country's rules, you can do it, but it would be stupid to think that people will come any where near you, you should also expect normal citizens to be paranoid and probably try to do something to stop a potential harm coming from you.

I have not tagged a single user for buying/selling account, but i sure see nothing wrong about it, since it's only fair that the majority of account buyers plan to conduct scam, despite being unfair to some members , i think it's only fair to tag those accounts once solid proofs have been presented.

How can it be deserved when a) the forum rules say you are allowed to buy account and the word discourage means

cause (someone) to lose confidence or enthusiasm.
"tedious regulations could discourage investors"
synonyms:   dishearten, dispirit, demoralize, make despondent, make downhearted, cast down, depress, disappoint, dampen someone's hopes, dash someone's hopes, cause to lose heart; More
prevent or try to prevent (something) by showing disapproval or creating difficulties.
"the plan is designed to discourage the use of private cars"
synonyms:   prevent, stop, put a stop to, avert, fend off, stave off, ward off; More
persuade (someone) against an action.
"we want to discourage children from smoking"
synonyms:   deter, dissuade, disincline, turn aside; More


Do you see any info on the forum rules that whe buying an account will lead to get your account destroyed ?
Discourage means to try someone to not do it like not smoking but everyone needs to decide themself.But it clearly doesnt mean when you smoke you get destroyed.

He choosed to buy the account for the signature campaign.If it were spammy or quality posts you don't know.Its just an assumption which leads to mistakes and drama.

But if you claim increasing posts for money (even quality one) is an abuse why don't you red tagg thepahamacist who flooded with his alt stupid posts to increase his payment which he openly admitted ?

Why are you not there activ ?Because he changed ?You gave him a chance but you won't give OP a chance and even destroy his main account ?

Buying an account with the sole purpose of joining a signature campaign and (most likely) spam this forum with nonsense is well deserved of a neg. All imo ofc.

I think you need to reconsider tagging nutildah.

read this and then tell me WHY you think he is trustworthy and not deserving of a tag

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50719875

Qs- well i would say it accomplished one thing the account was believed to have switched hands 4 or more times. Stated by the current owner; it won't be doing that anymore.

You're right that anyone engaging in this behaviour will need to go to greater lengths to avoid detection. It's the same for anyone trying to circumvent  "rules" or expectations. This does however make it less desirable to hack accounts for the purpose of selling them; which i would say is a net positive.

This member only contacted the seller for the required account recovery proof when they thought they may need to go through that process. Tells me that this may have come from an account farmer or someone who buys and sells a lot of accounts. Maybe this person now goes and spreads the word of how easily you can lose your investment and that maybe this forum isn't some cash cow to be milked. I would also consider thai a net positive.

I never intend to provide a false sense of security. Dealing over the internet one should not feel "safe" it leads to poor decisions. Anyone i've made feel that way through my actions should continue to research on their own; my feedback is for me and those that see value in it. Atriz was a fucked up situation but I'm not completely familiar with their past before the scammy bounty issue; nor am i concerned with that right now. They have sufficient warnings associated with them.

To your final point no one knows what OP would have done apart from spam the forum for money, and contribute nothing in the process. Spending 200 while supposedly broke and unable to feed 3 kids seems unlikely to me. So no one knows what they would have really done. Either way they can chose to participate in this forum, all i did was take away the guarantee of easy yobit money, which would have gotten them a ban anyways.

-Thule 
Tag them if you want. I see it as a service to the community and am thankful for how that was handled. The account is currently held in trust, not sold. I can't recall all the details but i believe suchmoon gave Bruno a donation/loan and then asked to lock the account by changing the password. All done to prevent the account being sold. It was done transparently as well. I also believe that all of Bruno's accounts were tagged.

On mobile replies are going to be sporadic.

So we should start tagging suchmoon for buying the account from Bruno,or Bruno for trying to sell his legandary account ?
How does it come they didn't tagged him ?

Every account seller and  buyer should be tagged and there is nothing wrong here, the wrong thing is when DT continue to give negatives even when you have proved that you have abandoned all bought accounts and use only one. This shows the non good will of DT members and that is the reason many members are leaving, even good members, no one cares about a spammer but this forum is like a tomb where I only read DT members replying to each other. Probably this was not what Satoshi designed this forum for in the first place.

And yet he went on to post useless drivel for Yobit. This nonsense that you keep repeating about the cost of the account being a guarantee against shitposting is not working. These assholes buy accounts because they're shitposters and are unable to rank-up on their own. Of course they're gonna shitpost and hope that mods won't notice them or won't consider their garbage bad enough for a ban.

So how does it come you didn't have tagged thephamacist who posted tons of racist shitposts for money ?He openly admitted doing so for money.
How does it come he has no red tagg from you since he was clearly using an alt account and would never admit it wouldn't he catched by another member doing so ?


You say beh to one user for doing so but don't say beh to a DT member who did the same ?

You are clearly pathethic which i could already see on your given trust feedbacks.

Nutildah the hypocritical scam facilitator in his own words wants me to believe what he is telling me now to defend his own skin? this person would obviously say or do anything for some btc crumbs. Yeah my opinion changed when I wanted to sell my own account. Oh really now?

Lauda just gets more flagrant about his double standards.

This openly demonstrates the deep problems the trust system has. We have those NOTILDAH OR NUTILDAH that knowingly wish to increase the probability of people getting scammed by selling their account... after stating selling accounts leaves people more vulnerable to getting scammed and wanting others red trusted for selling their accounts.

Then we have those even worse like  LAUDA who will tell lies to scam people, and is a probable extortionist and trust abuser who says NO OBSERVABLE EVIDENCE that can be presented will cause him to red tag his hypocritical scam enabling pal.

However he will tag you for presenting observable events from his own past.

The DT crew. Dirty Turds 1.

Fact that the OP left/decided to leave the forum is another sign that they bought the account only to spam the forum for some quick bucks.
If they wanted to take part in the YoShit campaign (however scammy that may sound) they could have used their own account to do so - it does not take much to be a contributory member of the forum and posting for the signature at the same time.

Liberalism speaking for them should drown themselves in more mind-altering drugs if they think buying accounts is something good for the forum after it had been considered as untrustworthy. Kids these days forget about the hard work their elders did for them and that they also need to go through the same if they wish to attain the top ranks of this forum.

Stubbornness at its peak in this thread, people keep forgetting that unfair means to something big are considered as cheating. Yet they will consider themselves as abused when punished for the same. MEH.

He just proofed my case.Checking the rules which clearly states that buying accounts are allowed.
You are creating yourself the conflict with that rule.
Anybody who wants to stick to the rules and check them may be a victim to your shit.
He bought it thinking its allowed.He was not aware its will lead into getting his account destroyed.
Would he know it i would bet he wouldn't have bought it in the first place because why else would he check forum rules before buying.
The working its allowed but discouraged doesn't describe that he will get punished for doing so.Why should somebody get punished for something which is allowed ?


And to the other members whoo tagged him enjoying to destroy his account they always have double standards or how else can you explain that they don't tagg proofen sellers and buyers or even sold accounts from their buddies like bruno or suchmoon.
How does it come that suchmoon was able to buy openly an account and that account is not being tagged as sold ?
There are so many examples its just disgusting.

At least i'm pretty sure theymos will soon remove the DT rating shit seeing how legit peoples account get destroyed who just try to follow the forum rules and make some money.

The disgusting part of these fucking losers is they claim they only care about the quality of that forum where in reality they only care about their earnings.Would they have no benefit you can trust me they all would be long time gone.

I knew this question will raise once a day that why bought account will get tag since its allowed by forum itself. Yes I know this is legit question. According to OP he bought account for earn money, not for discussion. And his/her account highlighted due to Yobit spam. OP didn't bought account for discussion on this forum or his/her intention wasn't to contribute something really. We know all this forum has created for discussion about crypto-currency although we are earning good from here. But just buy a account only for earning isn't wise decision in my opinion. Perhaps its excusable is someone buy account for discussion and contributions, then obviously he/she will able to earn from here. Directly joined after bought account means he/she will not contribute anything for forum. He/she just bought account for his/her own need.

If you need earn money then work hard. Don't choose shortcut. Find a job and build your own bitcointalk account by yourself. Once a day you will also able to earn if you build your account successfully.

It's to late for your apology, you always use reference that forum allow account sell. So why you panic now? Forum allow it but community not allow it. Couple of seller and buyer here, it doesn't mean they are the community. That's their profession. Community means total forum, and if you ask open questions then no one will allow to buy account except corrupted user.

The thing is you are not stopping anything by giving negative trust to those who have purchased accounts, you are only forcing people who are willing to do this to go to greater lengths to cover it up.

The OP did not fully understand that he is liable to get negative trust if it was found that he purchased his account. However he did (say he) have the private key associated with an address associated with the account, so he could "prove" he is the original owner, even though he is not. He also did not change the email address, and only changed the password once, so he reasonably was not going to get "caught" using a purchased account unless he admitted it.

The above is the problem with tagging these people. You are forcing them to take sufficient measure so that you really can't tell they purchased their account. If someone were to try to do something nefarious with a purchased account, they will have all the proof they need to demonstrate they are the original owner. On the other hand, if purchased accounts were not routinely tagged, there would be no need to sell private keys and change passwords minimal numbers of times, so it will be more obvious you are not dealing with the original owner.

You are also giving a false sense of security that all sold accounts will be tagged. aTriz for example was a purchased account but he "just so happened" to "slip through the cracks" of those tagging sold accounts, and he went on to do some bad things.

Also, according to the OP, he paid $200 for his account, which effectively serves as a bounty that he will not go around causing actual damage, or posting crap, otherwise he will be banned or prevented from participating in most signature campaigns.

He probably could in my sent rating history, but that is irrelevant anyway. Nothing he says will influence me to tag you or to remove any other tags.

Get over it cryptohunter. It was 3 fucking years ago. Times have changed. Obviously my stance on the issue has changed. Can you point to another instance where someone got tagged for a 3 year old account sale attempt? No? Then shut the fuck up already. There was no set precedent for this kind of issue. The account wasn't even sold. All available evidence points to me being the original owner. Continuing to drone on about a tired issue beaten to death already isn't winning you any sympathy points.

Maybe you and tecshare should just cry and hold each other while complaining that the world isn't fair because nobody likes you.

You are clearly missing the point.

Trust is about trust. Intention is a large part of this. Red trusting relating to account sales is all on topic. Your reasoning here relating to this entire subject is being examined. Stop trying to push that away by claiming it is off topic.

The nutildah account clearly said that they believed account sales were contributing to scammers gaining trust and were firmly against it in 2014. They were advocating the punishment of account sellers on those grounds. They firmly stated that selling accounts left members vulnerable to scammers.

In 2016 they decided to sell their account believing it would lead to people possibly getting scammed but not caring one shit. It is unknown whether the account sale went through or not.

How can you reason this initial poster is less trust worthy that your lunch time buddy nutildah who knowingly increased the probability of people getting scammed here?  He is by his own reasoning increasing the probability of people getting scammed here?

Please tackle this specific reason. Your reasoning seems unreliable and untrustworthy in itself. You would knowingly be pals with someone by their own reasoning wanted to increase peoples chances of getting scammed here?

Is that right? because that seems to be what you are saying. That to me is the type of reasoning the board should be made vulnerable too.

You had previously seemed semi impartial, this time you are clearly being biased.

You would trust someone who by their own statement would for their own financial gain knowingly increase the risk of people getting scammed here? these people you want to meet for beers?

We are discussing a specific case in which I left trust here. feel free to create your thread about Nutildah, I can choose to post there if I feel like it. Wait you probably already did, I likely skimmed saw it did not require me to act. Hard to say.

There is a big difference, you can't prove the account changed hands. I was told the account I tagged had changed hands.

No I already gave you my explanation not that I had to. Just because my reasoning doesn't match with your expectations doesn't mean I have to change. I have no trust or feedback overlap that I am aware of with nutildah. They also have not told me they bought/sold that account. I have chatted in passing with them in some threads, and would probably grab a beer and some good local cuisine if I ever made it to the Philippines. I believe most of those discussions were well before this modified trust system, but as I don't follow who's on DT or not so I can't confirm that


Again I don't follow who's on DT my feedback is left how I want in accordance of what I agree with. Like I've said you are free to leave feedback as you see fit, or claim facts as you see them. I will note that you want to see another user tagged for an attempt to sell an account several years ago, but haven't tagged either accounts for it yourself. So perhaps focus on how you use the feedback system, as opposed to how everyone else does.

Explain how this is a side issue? this is a directly related incident. This is building a case that your red is not valid unless you are ready to apply red to ALL account sellers.

Nutildah clearly stated account sales are allowing scammers greater possibility of pulling scam. He then either tried to sell or did sell the account. Nobody knows. This is knowingly increasing the probability of scamming on this board.

The initial poster has demonstrated nothing like this level of untrustworthy behavior.

You are simply trying to divert away from an On Topic debate about your red trust.  Explain why you find the nutildah account MORE trustworthy than the initial poster. I await you explanation.  Time past is a cop out.

You are employing double standards to favor your DT pals. That is clear.

I will use this specific case as double standards if you do not explain why you find this members actions more untrustworthy than nutildahs.

You can hope all you would like, and form your opinion of my standards as you see fit. Considering this goes back to before I was a twinkle in the forums eye (a member), it's well outside what I would tag. Iirc this is also close to but not past when sales became a taggable offence within the community.

I'll keep pointing this out as well. My feedback is for me, if I agreed with account sales then I wouldn't tag this member. If my feedback isn't up to your standards feel free to exclude me from your custom list, and/or have people remove me from their trust list. I honestly do not worry about being a DT member, I'm just using the system that's in place how I feel it should be used.

You may once again want to try and get back in the habit of staying on specific topics, and not broadening it to encompass all side grievances. I can't even remember how many different threads I've seen you post the Nutildah stuff.

Shitposting is not a business nor is it desirable here. Good riddance.

Please do not use that language towards me. Remain civil.

We are discussing trust. If you recognize in 2014 that selling your account leaves members vulnerable to scamming then decide to sell your account then by your own argument you are untrustworthy. Nutildah deserves red trust far more than this person.

I will see to it that he is tagged or that every other persons tag is removed for buying and selling accounts.

He argued that selling your account makes you untrustworthy before he went right ahead and decided to sell his own account.  If he strongly believed selling accounts leaves members open to scamming and went ahead and contributed to the probability of people being scammed.

We know that you will often protect know scammers and are untrustworthy sneaky and greedy yourself Huge Black Woman. You used that alt to troll racist sig spam for btc crumbs.


@ Steamtyme

I hope you will be red flagging the nutildah account or I will call you on double standards here. Read my above post for details.

Agree with it or not, I left the feedback. Here was my last post in that thread.

Didn't even notice this little doozy until I took a break from something else. To address some of the concerns I've seen


Regardless of how it came to light it's clear cut what happened. They clearly came here to misrepresent themselves and earn a paycheck. Sure the guy was honest about it, and hadn't scammed anyone. Who's to say when he sells the account the next person wouldn't. If left alone they would be under the impression that account sales are harmless and may just have helped keep up the practice. They can sort it out with the seller now if they want.



We differ on what could be related to scamming. Account sales fall well within my realm of shady/scammy behavior. They're a risk many people are not interested in tolerating. In the end it really only affect those who buy the account and come here to earn. That user could still conduct business here if they chose to try, there are even some campaigns taking red trust members. Unfortunately for them they didn't do their research, tried to take the easy way out, and it didn't work out for them.

I will also point out that it wasn't their reputation to lose.

Perfectly stated.  Plus I don't buy the hard luck story, as I strongly suspect this guy is a seasoned veteran of signature campaigns.  In any case, neither his account nor his life is ruined by having negative trust.

That was 2016 when there accounts were first starting to get tagged.  It didn't, and there's no explanation for this that you'd be satisfied with--and I'm not interested in feeding trolls.  Nobody is going to tag him for that now anyway.  Please fuck off.

He said he quit [the forum]. Regardless of what his rights are, it appears he will no longer participate here.

He spent money on buying his account, presumably to be able to participate in a signature campaign to earn money, and a newbie account (possiblyprobably the person who sold him the account) nearly immidiately opened a thread claiming the account was hacked. He now can no longer use that account to earn from a signature campaign.

The newbie account said the account was sold for $60 but was never paid, and the person posting from Vesperion says he actually paid $200 for it. IMO the price that Vesperion provided sounds more reasonable considering he can earn a little more than $100/week in the yobit campaign. Neither has provided any kind of signed message, nor evidence a payment for the account was made one way or another.

I am still able to conduct the amount of business I wish to conduct, under the circumstances that are acceptable to me, and as such, I continue to participate. Someone else who is unable to conduct business with their negative trust is not going to continue to participate.

He will be removed from the Yobit signature campaign, that's all.
Having a negative trust doesn't mean you don't have the right to participate in discussions.

You have a negative trust but still you are one of the most active users.

only DT members are allowed to sell and buy accounts on here, did you not know this?

this DT member nutildah is lecturing others here in 2014 on why they should NOT sell their accounts admits that selling accounts leaves other member vulnerable to getting scammed....

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/someone-buying-older-accounts-here-for-mass-propaganda-789658

then decides to sell their own account in 2016 so just 100% goes against everything they were saying.... and does not give a toss if people get scammed?? prime DT material I'm sure.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.5


his DT friends do not seem to feel this account needs a red tag??

a/ because he listed it for sale for months not caring if people get scammed.
b/ we don't even know it it was sold and the person just claimed it was no longer for sale. So it could certainly have been sold.

If you did something wrong then they should red tag that account also

They red tag people on "suspicion" like justiceforyou a vip member or even if they " think" you are an alt of someone.  

They only require PROOF beyond what is reasonably possible on an anonymous forum when it is one of them being examined.

Another person seems to have left the forum because their reputation was ruined for something unrelated to scamming.

You are right guys, i did it wrong. So, i apologies and quit.

You win 

Since you're playing that card: Here's another negative rating because the rules allow it.

Get a real job and stop being a leech, the forum is not a welfare state.

There is a general consensus among DTs that both buyer and seller have to be tagged.

What were you doing to feed your three kids before joining this campaign!
I advice you to find a real job as it became obvious for you that you can rely on the forum to be  your main source of income.

Sorry, I don't think Steamtyme or any other DT is going to make an exception for you especially after the retaliatory feedback you left for him.

That may or may not be true about your kids needing something to eat, but that isn't a forum problem.  It's a you problem, and the only concern good members of bitcointalk have is about the quality of the forum.  It isn't a workplace.  It isn't a charity.  How were you feeding these alleged children right before Yobit started up their campaign, anyway?

You must have missed the fact that account buyers and sellers have been getting tagged since 2016.  Again, that's on you.  There are forum rules and then there are unwritten rules.  You do realize that scamming isn't against the rules here, right?  Yet scammers routinely get tagged.  Same concept with account dealers.

Half of the accounts on this forum are bought... Nice job on promoting honesty, now next time he just won't say anything. Kind of dumb tagging people for admitting that, sure go ahead and tag me, I'm just saying my opinion. Sure account buying is discouraged but it happens all the time, at least this guy was honest about it and hasn't scammed anyone.

That's not what he got negative trust for, which is what he's complaining about (that part's in right the thread title, too).

Because account sales are looked down upon in this forum.

Read the bold print.

Not just him, but any other DT member can do that because account sales only lead to scammers, spammers to enter the forum and simply pay to get access to an old account which is the reason you also bought this account for.

If you need money work hard like every other forum member here and "EARN" your rank. Not go for the easy way out.

Mods dont care about the trust system - you see now? This is a reason why account sales are discouraged. It makes inexperienced people enter the forum with no knowledge about how it works.

Well someone who wants to spam the forum with 140posts/week has no life in my opinion. No hard feelings.

Your tagging of Steamtyme was a false tag. That is the actual abuse. Learn about the trust system before you speak on it.

---

Enjoy more negative trust from other DT members (including me). Feel free to go on a rampage now. Cheers and bye.

He was being accused of hacking the account not purchasing it... If you read the thread you would know that (in the post no less) Please read the post before spamming or you kindly fuck off.

Yes, i bough this account and make it public because i don't have anything to hide, i'm not scamming people, i'm just hones, and if be hones will be my sin then its fine, i prefer to die telling the truth than to join to this great community with lies.

He did buy this account. He admitted it (in the title of this very thread, no less). Please read at least the title of the thread before spamming in it or kindly fuck off.

True, I think his point is more along the lines of he is being accused of something he did not do and is getting negative trust for a false accusation. Not against the rules but if people knew they probably would remove it.

Like it or not, giving negative trust to account buyers is also allowed.

A troll newbie decide to start a fake accusation against me. And trusted users decide to support him.

Thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hacked-account-spamming-yobit-sig-5134065

The issue:

I self admitted that i bough this account because the forum allow it as we can see on the forum rules:


I join to Yobit signature campaign because i don't have a job and my 3 kids need something to eat, not because i love Yobit, but now is over because user Steamtyme can burn anyone reputation without consequences.

Then i ask mods and admins, why we have rules if the trusted users gives no fucks against them?. Like it or not account sales are allowed! I'm not scamming people or doing something illegal, i'm just trying to get a job to feed my kids. I'm not a bad guy.

If you think i do something wrong please go and give me a negative trust. If you think account sales should be banned then talk with the forum admin, but please don't destroy the life of the guy who is trying to earn some btc with his time and work.

Hope some users can talk with Steamtyme to remove the neg, because that was an abuse.