Topic: Using the trust system for personal Vendetta - page 2. (Read 1306 times)

This answer is for: suchmoon, Steamtyme and The Pharmacist, (If I missed something, let me know - I will fix it).

I don't have such a long posts history, so I looked through, (and I found three incidents that may have been implied).

• Quote (source link was provided, but inaudible).
• Full copy of one dead thread without source citation (but the title states that the thread is for bbcode parsing).
• It may be about images (but their source is free photo banks).
• Also in one thread the specified source was moved to the header.

---

• WhiteManWhite ^DT1 said he would wait for a response from the moderator, as you can see he received it (but the tag is active).

I refrained from answering and from provocations from WMW until a response from the moderator was received, (The user was also notified). I will not publish any other insults here.

• After the notification, the WhiteManWhite did not remove the red tag, but added another one! Referring to the post I added to the title.

I received a PM as well.  Not sure what I'm supposed to say in response that hasn't already been said here in this thread.

This thread gets better by the post.

Now we have that sad old perv nullius complaining about getting trust abused.

Let's think about this.  Nullius account is resurrected to red tag cryptohunter for not even excusing plagiarism but simply saying making fun of their rather sad stories was in poor taste. Now nullius here again trying to defend plagiarism from icopress  after already debasing himself and looking like a total idiot and hypocrite defending laudas sneaky deliberate plagiarism.

He should have already a tag from every DT who should be holding nullius to his own publicly stated opinions on the use of the trust system.

Nobody can take nullius serious after that.  I mean that and stalking out and pestering members he considers may be female.

Everyone should be held to their own standards at the very least.
Icopress is clearly another spaz who thinks he can give out red tags for any reason he wants but requires others to spare him red tags for clearly far more serious " evils" than being ignored by a bunch of scammers and scammer protectors.

Lol these threads are more hilarious by the day.

These weasels are crying about being treated a lot better than they treat others? Go cry to momma icopress you pathetic hypocritical gimp. Bring some real gripes where people are treating you any worse than you treat others

Only icopress is allowed to use red tags for personal retribution folks. Same for that pervy ugly old turd nullius.
I'm using a special method to transform their tears into lube. Feels lush. Splat.


Btw Lfcbitcoin is a proven liar and proven bitch that will say what lauda or likely icopress tells them too so you can ignore that twat.

Ask lfcbitcoin if he thinks giving red tags for

1. Saying it is in poor taste to make fun of peoples reasons for copy and paste
2. Being on ignore lists.
3. Undeniable proof of telling lies
4. Bribing people and abusing the trust system
5  scamming?

You will find his answers very amusing.

Let's hear them?

Most of the twats here deciding if Whitemanwhite is allowed to use red tags in a far more sensible manner than they are shouldn't even be in positions of trust in the first place.

Don't believe me then ask for evidence you can confirm for yourselves.

Not one person here claiming what WMW has done is wrong would be able to defend their post sensibly in light of their other actions.

Lfc bitcoin has given out red tags to this account for telling the truth?? Lol is that allowed lfcbitcoin?
Want to deny it?
Bring your argument here for me to eviscerate.

The end result is WMW is fully entitled to red tag for any reason he wants like the other DT members do and his reason is far more valid than theirs. If you want to make fair comparisons.

We can do that now if you're still not clear.  

OK, I may have a certain level of bias because I have a good relationship with icopress but after looking through everything I just think red tagging for plagiarism of a bunch of pics is ridiculous. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anybody accused of plagiarism for posting photos/pics before. icopress wasn’t trying to pass it off that the photos were taken by him so plagiarism it is not.

The majority of us have posted pics/photos that we didn’t personally design/create on the forum.

See below -



WhiteManWhite red tagging icopress for supposed plagiarism is against what the trust system is designed for. Trust ratings left are personal & subjective but you can’t not trust somebody because they posted some photos, it’s ridiculous. How is trading with icopress a risk based on posting photos?

DERP!

WhiteManWhite, I suggest you be mature about this & remove the red tag you left icopress.

Thanks.

News:  WhiteManWhite has abused the trust system by issuing negative feedback for insults.

---

On the Wall to End Walls

Quote from: SFR10 on November 04, 2020, 02:25:10 AM

Not sure why all of those so-called plagiarized posts by icopress is still there...
_{- AFAIK, it should be counted/reported as off-topic/spam since it has nothing to do with Wall Observer's thread ^{[unless I'm missing something]}.}

Yes, you are missing something.  Please don’t opine about the Wall Observer unless you have been there.  (And don’t bother the forum moderators with noise reports over this.)

WO is a sort of a forum within a forum.  It is “self-moderated” by a theymos-appointed user whose position is tantamount to unofficial staff.  Most of the posts there are way, way off the topic stated in its OP.  It sort of has its own rules, which can only be discovered by lurking there for awhile.

Fascinating fact:  A few years ago, Lauda was a candidate for the Wall Observer’s “self-moderation” office that was won instead by infofront.  Due to Lauda’s putative womanhood, her nomination triggered an insane tirade by r0ach—whose posts more usually consisted of theories about how the Jews invented Bitcoin to scam you.  LOL.

I myself have a reputation for posting classical and neoclassical nude sculptures and paintings—intentionally without overt identification, because people unmitigated savages who are too lazy to figure it out just don’t deserve to know; e.g.:

Quote from: nullius on September 21, 2020, 10:33:28 PM

Always timely.

N.b. that the forum’s “NSFW” rules do apply on the Wall; fine-art paintings and sculptures are not “NSFW”, and I have always posted those anywhere that they fit the topic.  My point is that it’s not “off-topic” on WO—not any more than all of the many posts by others of photos of women in bikinis or lingerie.  It will take you awhile to understand what can be posted there.

I think that icopress’ posts fit in well on the Wall.  :-)  —And if he were to wind up annoying anybody, then he would probably just get one of these:

Quote from: nullius on October 03, 2020, 01:26:23 PM

Quote from: Toxic2040 on October 03, 2020, 12:46:19 PM

Quote from: 600watt on October 03, 2020, 12:17:14 PM

250 btc buy wall on stamp @10550

sorry for off-topic

Thanks.  I’ll save that for everybody who ever mentions, among other things, the American reality-TV “election” show—about which I was working on a P&S meta-complaint, when I delved into a minor tangent on Antifa.

That animated GIF is completely unattributed!!^*  Toxic2040 must be banned!!!

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: nullius on November 03, 2020, 04:11:36 PM

Quote from: WhiteManWhite on November 03, 2020, 10:34:23 AM

For this serious violation, this user should be banned

---

* Damn it, fellas, please do pour on some “sauce” unless you are trying to make a puzzle...

When you see nullius now defending copyright or plagiarism you can smell icopress is either lauda or nullius alt.

Icopress himself uses the trust system for personal vendetta. I posted on his shitty awards thread and he then gave me a red tag for... being on peoples ignore lists? Lol

Then comes crying someone else has correctly noticed he is using on many many different occasions many many examples of other peoples work with no references at all.  These were not intended for his use or purpose.

So he is a hypocrite and pathetic cry baby duplicitous weasel who looks shady and by his own standards clearly meets the threshold for red trust.

If you see nullius defending someone that is usually the gold standard to tell if they are dangerous and high risk.
I suspect this icopress is lauda or nullius. Look at his prior posts they stink of lauda.

He deserves red tags by his own standards of giving them out.
Let him live by his own standards. 

Here as well after icopress's PM...

---

I'm not going to comment in regards to whether it was a plagiarized post or not since other users did a great job at giving detailed explanations but I would like to point to two things...

• All of this began with a simple misunderstanding on WhiteManWhite's part on two occasions:
  
  • The way you interpreted "icopress's intention in his/her post in DT changes thread".
  • Your definition of plagiarism as opposed to other users.
• Not sure why all of those so-called plagiarized posts by icopress is still there...
  _{- AFAIK, it should be counted/reported as off-topic/spam since it has nothing to do with Wall Observer's thread ^{[unless I'm missing something]}.}

None of these dramas would happen if all of us could practice having an impartial view of the surroundings.

---

Another workaround:

I'd rather call you traveller "Dorozhnaya" for you.

https://youtu.be/VVkwoY6dQFo

= I am busy, and a common злoдeй such as you is not worth following.


Пёc ёб твoю мaть.

---

Just call me old-fashioned.

You don't follow the of information stream, I've chewed it all up for you, you just have to swallow it.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.55514902
You may need to use a translator, but I'm doing it

Whoops.  My apologies for continuing the off-topic discussion on the plagiarism report thread, an important resource which should not be cluttered with this.

My initial reply thereby is too long to quote here reasonably.  It is relevant.  Now, since WhiteManWhite is copying his nonsense between threads...

---

Redirected from the other thread, where it is off-topic:

• Unlike you, the forum’s staff are not blithering idiots.  They know the difference between plagiarism and alleged copyright issues, which you persist in conflating.  They also know how the forum rules apply to images.
• Newbie protip:  Your quote failed proper attribution guidelines.  FTFY:
  
  
  Quote from: WhiteManWhite on November 03, 2020, 11:04:00 PM
  Quote from: nullius on November 03, 2020, 10:59:02 PM

  ~
  

  
  I think the moderator will judge who is right and who is not.
  

We are losing the thread of this contention. What are we going to do about it?

That's the difference between how many DT1 members include or exclude that user. If strength is 0 or more - the user is in DT, if it's negative then not in DT. So if that number is not accurate then the whole list might be inaccurate... that's why I said I'll need to double-check it.

Edit: it's probably accurate but at the end of the DT2 list there are DT1 members shown with "0" strength. That's what looked suspicious to me. I don't think they should be there. But otherwise the lists seem to be fine. Carry on

I was only looking for the list of DT1 and DT2 actually but I can't see it on the home page [can this be done?] so I tried the "report". The inaccuracy in strength is just a coincidence. I don't even understand what is it for.

Hmmm... these don't seem to be accurate. I'll check what's going on there.

https://bpip.org/Profile?p=WhiteManWhite

Hover on DT1 under the avatar - it shows strength 4. That's accurate.

I think bpip.org has this
- DT1 https://bpip.org/Report?r=dtstrength
- DT2 https://bpip.org/Report?r=dt2strength

I can't be sure if that's all the list. Maybe suchmoon can confirm later.

I don't take offense to people from the Internet, it would be stupid And I've already started getting a red trust for myself, it's so cool
But his statement, the way he prepared it, showed it, and the time spent on it clearly indicated a veiled accusation.


Yes, it is.

This looks like an issue of negative feedback being left for posting an image from the internet and considering that plagiarism.  I don't agree with that, and it isn't even necessary to leave a neg for an outright plagiarist of the written word (though I don't consider it a major transgression if one is left).

What is this rude response by WhiteManWhite?  I can't read Russian.

I also don't see why WMW took offense to that "victim" statement by OP.  It didn't look to be negatively aimed at WMW from my point of view. 

Indeed, and I'd like to hear from icopress about that.

Is WhiteManWhite on DT or what?  I don't even know how to tell anymore without searching Meta for Theymos's monthly update thread, and even then I don't know who's on DT2.

Vod, 6-7 (Only those whose judgments I trust)  

How many of us did he PM?