Topic: VOD should be removed from default trust for systematic abuse of his position - page 42. (Read 55297 times)

Vod is still at Depth 2 from Default Trust, so obviously Vod did not trigger the same reaction. In you opinion he should have triggered it, but Badbear, Canaryinthemine, and Tomatocage disagree with you. "Pushing peoples buttons" may cause people to not trust you. Those people may publish that by leaving negative feedback. It is all based on opinion. Many people trust you. Some people don't. That sounds reasonable to me. I am neutral to you because I don't know you. Vod doesn't trust you cause he said you're a liar. Takagari thinks you're trustworthy by merit of fighting Vod's feedback behaviour. That's all valid in my book.

Bottom line is that you cannot directly decide who someone trusts or not. Though of course you can influence it in many ways, ranging from exposing a persons foul play to slandering.

Also, as attractive as Vod is, I have no relationship with him other than that we happen to both post on this forum. So I am not a shill. I do think his method is effective though, so you may call me a supporter . However since the introduction of neutral feedback, I think may be more appropriate for hotheads.

Okay, maybe I can concede on takagari, although I would say his actions show that if any business deal were to not go smooth then any deal would only get worse. I personally would "trade with caution" with him.

In regards to TECHSHARE I think he is too eager to be on default trust list. I cannot point to anything specific as to how this makes him a scammer (I also have not given him negative trust) however I do have somewhat of a bad feeling about him wanting to be on default trust so badly

Reposting for new thread.

Vod, what "lies" have takgari or TECSHARE or iCEBREAKER told about you?

Again, you have failed to read the post, and completely missed the point. I will assume good faith, and assume that you are not intentionally misinterpreting my posts (3 times today) in order to distract the discussion.

When you leave someone a negative rating claiming "X", "X" should be true.

Leaving someone a negative feedback for "X" (ie: 'lying about me') when you cannot prove or even substitute X is inappropriate.

Someone being hot headed makes them a scammer? I think you all are missing what negative feedback is for:

"Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."

Will a reasonable person think "being hot headed" is a reason for "strongly believing this person is a scammer"?

I would say that Vod's rating for both takagari and TECHSHARE are valid, although the comments may need some editing. takagari is very hot headed and essentially blew up when the trust rating was not immediately removed and his comment about him being hotheaded is true.

TCHSHARE seems to be a little too eager to be on default trust list and previously used his former position on such in order to silence people who were making valid concerns. He stood to financially benefit from such silence. VOD on the other hand does not stand to financially benefit from his critics being silenced

And again, let's repost this one. Where VOD CLEARLY lie's, even bending the time line of things to make me 100% the bad guy, and him the angle.

Irrelevant, please don't try to muddy the waters:

"Constantly posts lies about me in an effort to have me removed from the default trust list."

We are asking for a substantiation of his trust rating, that is, a lie that TECSHARE made about VOD.

Prove it, sure, but than say that in the rating.

Hilariously, Vod has just left iCEBREAKER negative trust after iCEBREAKER gave him neg trust for this incident. Vod is claiming that iCEBREAKER has "lied" about him, again with no substantiation of how he supposedly "lied".

I made a new thread about this here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vod-just-left-negative-feedback-for-icebreaker-after-he-left-vod-negative-rating-916867

The irony of this is blaring. TECSHARE is calling for the removal of Vod from default trust list because he feels like Vod is trying to silence him, while the exact reason that TECSHARE was removed was because he was trying to silence a critic who had very valid points in his posts/criticism

This, as well. Vod, can you quote any lie that takagari or TECSHARE has made, that justifies a negative trust rating?

If either of them has deleted / edited anything, I'm sure the admins can recover it.

He never could on the five pages of my thread, he won't here. All he has on me was saying he laughed and yelled in a pm, which wasnt what he said, simply the context I took from the pm.
I called him a liar, he also stated I was clearly not a canadian. So he is allowed to make an assumption, produce a lie based on it, and not have any repercussions, but when a member is wronged or insulted and get's mad. That's the end for them?

This thread is for Vod, I understand that you feel you've been treated very unfairly but the thread would be more useful if we focus on the specific incident at hand -- ie, vod leaving you negative trust without substantiation, in what appears to be an attempt at stifling speech.

True, it's not black and white. But in this instance, Vod has not justified any supposed "lies" that TECSHARE has made regarding him. I've skimmed through TECSHARE's posting history and I don't see any 'lies' or 'slander'.

Vod seems to have the assumption that you are only allowed the discuss the behavior of him in a few isolated, carefully worded posts. If you continue to post about him and how he should be removed from DefaultTrust, despite not slandering, you are throwing "FUD" and he negatively trusts you.

Vod, how about doing what has been requested in page 1 -- quote the "lies" or "slander" TECSHARE has made?

Why is it this laissez faire attitude was not applied to me? I made the argument that Armis was in fact slandering me having never made a transaction with me, but staff saw to it that I was removed none the less. If I had continued to "abuse" the trust then clearly people would have untrusted me by their own accord without staff lending a helping hand to ensure I was removed for certain in response to a single incident. I think you and I both know this is a valid trust abuse claim regardless if you are going to come out and say it explicitly or not. This is not the first time VOD has had legitimate accusations lodged against him. Why is it that he gets chance after chance after chance, and I am removed over a single dispute?

This is based on people being anonymous, right? My real name and city are known.  I might care a little more than BadBear might because I don't take steps to hide my identity.  BadBear is a nickname while Martin Lawrence is not.  Albeit, Martin Lawrence is a common name, but I still take offense when someone accuses me of something I'm not doing.  And if I'm not doing it, that makes them a liar.  And if they lie, how can I trust them?


I've posted this many times as well.  BadBear and I don't know each other.  I'm sure we have a mutual respect this industry deserves, and I may trust him more than I would trust a stranger, but we are not in cahoots in any way.  I'm not being protected by BadBear or any other moderator on this forum.  I've actually gone to bed a few times with anxiety that I may wake up to a negative trust rating.  

I think what it basically boils down to is what TF said.


Is lying or slander a good reason to leave someone negative feedback (free speech is irrelevant)? Personally I don't think it's so black and white, more of a grey area. An example, and for the purposes of this we'll say that I do in fact care what people on the internet say about me  . If someone were to start posting that I'm really pirate@40 in disguise, fabricating evidence, etc, and I leave this person negative feedback, is that really a wrong thing to do? The answer to this is going to vary from person to person, and at the heart of that answer is going to be, whether or not you trust me. If you do trust me, then it is valid feedback, because he's a known liar who can not be trusted. If you don't trust me, then maybe I really am Pirate, and I'm leaving this feedback in order to silence my critics and slander those who dare speak the truth. There are degrees in between of course. It all comes down to your own opinion and your perception of those involved. Opinions, outhouses, etc. Some people are okay with others having different opinions, some are not.

Vod isn't my buddy, I don't know him personally, and he is only in my trust list as long as the community thinks he should be. If the community doesn't trust him, then I would remove him (though note that lots of complaints means nothing if the complaints aren't valid). With the addition of exclusions, it's no longer necessary for Vod to removed from anyone's trust list, just for enough people in the right places to distrust him enough (or his feedback) to exclude him.

perhaps.

have you heard the old adage "you can't fight city hall"?

you can take your principled stance, and it will have an impact but
you will still have to pay your ticket (have neg trust).

anyway I'm done here.  best of luck!

No, because I'm basically a taxi driver saying VOD suck's and VOD holds the power of a MAyor on these forums it seems, so it's not fair.

I can, have, one post up actually, PROVEN how he out right lie's to make his feedback worse.

So even if he is right, and I lied, (I did say he yelled and laughed at me in a pm, when he in fact didnt) Than the feedback should state that. NOT the truth bending it currently spews.