Topic: Vod needs to be removed from DefaultTrust. - page 3. (Read 2662 times)

Yes, yes it was.  And I spent all day thinking that it was wrong when I couldn't access a computer.  As soon as I logged in, I removed the negative trust.

You are talking about things being blown out of proportion? Wasn't VODs original rating for this user supposedly lying about his zipcode? What in the fuck does that have to do with scamming? If that is not blowing things out of proportion I don't know what is.

Ah, is this another case of you believing something so it's "well known"?   

Regardless of your assumption that a negative rating does not inhibit trading, it does in fact do so. People in this community are already SO PARANOID about getting ripped off, that all some one has to see is the red rating and their brain turns off, and they move on. It does IN FACT destroy ones ability to trade almost completely.

I love also that your supposed solution as some one who peddles other people's trust is for honest users to buy another account. Self interested much? Further more even if an honest user did try to buy an account his immediately puts them under suspicion of being a scammer and from that moment on they will be treated as such. It is well known that a lot of the account sales are either run by or closely monitored by staff so they can keep lists of scammer suspects. All this would do is make that formerly trusted user enter further into the realm of being suspect, and at that point why try to be honest if everyone is making it so hard and treating you like a scammer?

You were lying about having his phone number. I agree it may have been more of a bluff then lie, however you did blow things way out of proportion prior to him even seeing the first thread about your claim. IMO his statement about being hot headed is accurate and is a reason to not want to do business with you as if/when something goes wrong then chances of things getting resolved are low

Agreed, but what 3 or more cases has he caught me in a lie. Especially one of enough importance to show my untrustworthy.
If you look at the other thread, I took apart the feedback he left me, as it was in fact full of lie's to make things seems worse.

Well why don't we look at the effects of getting a negative trust report from someone on default trust list. Assuming you do not have preexisting trust feedback to overcome the negative trust then you will get a trade with extreme caution tag. If you are someone who engages in business that requires an extreme amount of trust, for example someone who deals in gift cards or may need to handle personal information then yes this tag would be detrimental to your business. If however you engage in business where transactions can easily be moderated by some kind of trusted escrow service then all a trade with caution tag will do is get a person's customers to want to use escrow more often. As these people make more deals the positive trust they receive will outweigh one scam report from one user (if one person gives two or more scam reports on the same person it will only count as one).

A honest person can buy a new account with fresh neutral trust in the event it is tarnished beyond repair as you describe would happen. IMO a honest person is actually more likely to do so then a scammer because a scammer is risking the purchase price of the new account for when they get caught again while an honest person with an unjust scam rating intends to continue to operate honestly moving forward.

I personally think Vod giving negative trust by jumping the gun like he originally did in the case discussed in the OP is an exception to the rule.

I would disagree that "lying" is not a valid reason to give someone negative trust. If you are lying about how much bitcoin you have or about your prior trade history then you are trying to get your trading partner to be more comfortable with you which would potentially make them more vulnerable to get scammed. In order to scam someone you obviously need to lie at least one time in order to get the other person to give you money in the assumption they will get something in return.

Always with the insults and attacks to win huh? It's only 11pm.

You said it.
And what other lie's.
I stated that the pm I got from you you yelled and laughed at me.
You may not have said that or wrote LOL But it's all in context

I did mean scammers, yes. Simple question though. Which is the bigger barrier? The one VOD puts up for scammers via shotgunning negative ratings everywhere with little or no evidence, or the honest users that have all of their time money and effort wasted who at THE VERY LEAST have to wait months to even discuss having it removed. IMO this is just leading to innocent users being falsely accused and either driving them away or driving them into the ranks of trolls and scammers.

I repeat - A scammer can just get a new name or buy a new account. An HONEST USER loses all the time, money, and effort they invested into their username (often years of work) over accusations that VOD does not even bother to verify most of the time. Several of his ratings are simply for "annoying" him or "lying". Last time I checked that is not an acceptable use of the trust system. VODs practices are FAR MORE DESTRUCTIVE to this community than the good he may or may not do "stopping" scammers (who return minutes later).

This is a well known subversion tactic. Get the enemy playing whack-a-mole so much that thy start catching up honest people, then as more and more honest people are burned sentiment turns against the authority handing these dictates down. It is a recipe for this community's destruction.

You are lying right now.  

I don't continue to state you're not Canadian... I think I said it ONCE when you couldn't spell the name of your country and you thought postal codes were all numbers.

Please feel free to provide your imaginary proof that I continue to state this.

I thought you were down for the night...

This guy BTW is my other negative trust, not really sure why, I paid back his loan. B=But he has me blocked, and still feels a need to step in and call VOD out?...


Thanks for support

Well.
Funny really

VOD leaves negative feedback over on me, as he reads my thread wrong, than continues to state I'm not even Canadian.

I PM him.
A few hours and nothing, than I see he has been online (Apparently his profile lied, no way for me to know this)
So I send him a pissed off PM, and a few more thread's. As I had spent the day looking at ALL the people he has trust scammed.

A staff ask's me to remove my negative on him, so I do, and I lock two of the threads.
After a while he decides to admit he was wrong, and removes my negative, instead replacing it with a neutral, still calling me a liar and warning people to stay away.

So I replace my negative and don't accept this.
He called me a liar, without proof. Why can he simply attack a person over them say "My postal code has 000 in it" Which really meant "Has zero's in it" or "When the letters are removed I end up with three zeros"
And than go on another thread of mine, state I'm not likely even Canadian.

I wanted all trace of his attacking my character gone from my trust system, He has NEVER had a personal dealing with me.

If he at this point wishes to leave a neutral, saying I'm a hot head. That would be acceptable.

But the old neutral was calling me a liar, a cheat and warning people away.

A joke really.
Just look a the thread's, how he goes in circles. and ignores my questions, continues to call me a liar.

If by "assume he helps with the trolls" you mean he helps with the scammers, then yes a lot of people do assume that. It is too bad that you cannot see more stats about the user when you look at trust reports on someone's trust page (you can only see the username, trust rating/score, amount risked, reference link and comment). It would be helpful if you could see things like rank, number of posts and date registered. I am fairly certain that if this information was more easily available then you would see that most of Vod's sent feedback is to brand new users and users at junior member or lower. The exceptions to this rule is for people who have defaulted on loans and who have a scam accusation against them.

It is possible to recover from a negative trust rating from Vod (or anyone else on default trust list), however it will just take time. It would be inaccurate to say it is impossible to continue to do business when you have a negative rating (just look at TF - he has a horrible rating but is still able to do a small amount of business).

edit: yes it is more difficult to do business with a negative rating but it is still possible.

Yes, because clearly EVERYONE agrees with VOD.

I was able to prove that the person i left negative feedback on was a liar and that my feedback was backed with evidence yet i was still removed.

Ah, so now you are smarter than everyone else on the forum?

Everyone's assumption is wrong, but yours alone is right?

 

See the problem I have with this, is that people ASSUME he helps with the scammers. In reality all he does it force them to change names, and in the mean time people who are trying to operate honestly have their hard earned trust burned! Which one are we inhibiting more, the scammer or the honest innocent user caught up in "scambusting" bullshit with little or no evidence? I don't beleive he is providing a service any longer because his standards are so low and he enjoys tormenting people far too much. IMO VOD and other "scambusters" are the main source of mailcontent over the trust system.

So because the staff don't bother to confront you on the STACK of justified accusations against you, as well as several non scamming related feedbacks, some how our situations were similar? I am absolutely disgusted to be compared to you with the way you act. You are in fact abusive and you are not only careless in how you apply negative ratings to people, you also leave them for things like "annoying" you or "lyng", things which are NO DIFFERENT than what my supposed unjust use of trust was for. Yet there they sit still in your feedback, and staff continue to back you up regardless of how abusive or unrestrained you have become.

Well to be fair if everyone had listened to Vod then no one would be worrying about being able to withdraw their money from bitstamp when it reopens

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/nejc-kodric-bitstampnet-38966

Hey, I know where you're coming from.  I almost got removed from DefaultTrust last night for a SINGLE INCIDENT from ONE COMPLAINT.  Luckily, I had already spent the day believing I was wrong and was removing the feedback anyway.  My sponsorship in Defaulttrust is no different than yours was - except that I am willing to remove unjustified feedback.  There has been no one that has complained about me that I haven't easily proven they are a liar. 

So I'll ask you to stop lying - I'm not in a special boys club and I don't abuse anyone.

I agree that Vod is sometimes a little aggressive when dealing with people. I wouldn't say that he is entirely to blame as the people he is generally aggressive with tend to attempt a campaign (or in this case campaigns) against Vod. I do however consider him to be fair with his ratings most of the time (as in 99.9%+).

I think a lot of the "Vod drama" would go stop if he were to simply "walk away" once the person he is dealing with starts things like personal attacks and trolling him.

Vod should not be removed from Default trust list as he has way too many people negative rated as scammers and he puts in a lot of time and effort into preventing scams. There are few other, reputable people on here that are willing to put in this much effort into protecting the community.