https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-question-of-vod-and-depth-2-trust-list-878629I am sorry if this is not your shill but he has a similar writing style and made the thread around the same time you were removed from default trust.
If you are not asking to be put back on then I don't understand what you are contiously complaining about as if you don't want to be on default trust then being removed does nothing to you.
The fact that vod is abusing his position on default trust is debatable, I personally don't think he is but I do see your point of view. What is not debatable however is that he is not abusing it for his own personal gain. He is not giving negative trust for people asking him questions about his business practice nor is he directly benefiting when he gives negate trust.
I know that you have used vod as an example multiple times when complaining about being removed from default trust list.
You only started advocating for the trust system to be changed once you were removed from default trust and I had not seen a single post by you speaking against default trust prior to you being removed.
I already stated I have no other accounts or shills, so no, that is not me.
The reason I am complaining is because:
1. I never requested to be on the default trust list. I am not sure how I am expected to be responsible for something that I never agreed to.
2. The responsibilities included along with being on the default trust list were NEVER presented to me or explained, and are not written anywhere, leaving me to look to other community members... like VOD to serve an example of what is acceptable practice and what is not for leaving trust.
3. The staff swear up and down that they do not moderate trust, but they clearly do. In my case Theymos personally asked for my removal from the trust of two individuals on the default trust. I was not removed because they did not trust me, I was removed because Theymos asked them to. This was punishment for not obeying staff directives to remove my feedback before Armis removed his harassing slander from my sales threads, and a backdoor way to extort me into modifying my trust rating that they swear up and down they do not moderate.
4. I was removed from the default trust list AND untrusted 2x from people on the default trust list (effectively negating any other people who trust me in the lower default tree as well) for a conflict I did not start and offered a mutually restorative resolution to:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/staff-hypocrisy-and-selective-enforcement-of-rules-853522This was insult to injury after my reports were ignored by the staff and I corrected the erroneous value left on the trust. They instead insisted that leaving the rating at all was an abuse of the trust and my refusal to submit to their demands that I remove it was reason for my removal and further punishment of exclusion from trust which I had rightfully earned by trading impeccably here for over 3 years. Additionally staff was quick to slander me publicly and unwilling to listen to any of my points, treating me as if I alone was responsible for the conflict from start to finish, and Armis was purely a victim and not at all an instigator (clearly not true).
5. Selective enforcement of the rules by staff. The main reason I keep bringing up VODs abuse, is because he has done EXACTLY what they claim I have done OVER AND OVER and none of the staff ever even challenge him on it publicly let alone remove him from the default trust list. VODs behavior is clearly abusive and out of line, but for some reason the staff protect him in spite of his willful and brazen repeated abuse of his position on the default trust FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL BENEFIT of silencing people questioning his behavior.
6. Complete ambiguity of unwritten rules. Apparently the staff don't like to write any rules down, because, you know some one might hold them to it.
Apparently people are supposed to just GUESS what the rules are, and if they break one well there isn't usually a warning, just punishment metered out without discussion. Apparently because the staff know what the rules are, the rest of us should know, like via osmosis or something.
7. VODs abuse of the default trust he left for me is NO DIFFERENT than the reason for which staff claimed I was removed from the default trust. Well, except one thing, VOD lied in his trust rating for me, I however was truthful about exactly why I left my rating. He seems to believe if he just puts "I don't think this person is trustworthy" on the end of his trust abuse comment, it magically makes it acceptable.
In summary this isn't about getting back on the default trust or trying to get VOD removed from the trust list (until now), it is about pointing out the fact that the trust system is broken, staff have absurdly ambiguous standards which they selectively enforce and refuse to clarify, along with their disconcerting eagerness to toss out and slander trusted members who have worked very hard to build trust over years for infractions that they refuse to enforce uniformly for all users. In stead of confronting their broken system they would rather rip apart the community starting with the MOST TRUSTED members (except for them and their special pals of course).
I have never been a big fan of the default trust, but until I was removed I had no way to know that trust was actually moderated, default trust users has unwritten and unspoken responsibilities, or that it was so insanely simple for trolls, scammers, and extortionists to have some one removed from the default trust. In short, I had no way of knowing these abuses existed until they were perpetrated upon me personally.
Once again, how exactly is VODs negative rating for me NOT ABUSE? Its ONLY PURPOSE is to punish me for pointing out the many incidents of his default trust abuse, which is CLEARLY abusing the default trust to serve his own personal vendettas and an attempt to silence my LEGITIMATE criticism of him. "scambusting" is nothing than a veil of legitimacy he uses to get away with far more abuse than would be tolerated from anyone here. People claim all his attacks are from scammers trying to slander him for doing such a good job "scambusting", but that is patently false as this case demonstrates clearly. Furthermore his careless and abusive use of the trust system does FAR MORE HARM to honest users caught up in his accusations, than it does to scammers who just return on a new account minutes later, and honest users are not so easily replaced. Overall VOD is more destructive to this community than anything, even when you account for his efforts "stopping" scammers.
Pointing out his abuse is not equivalent to calling for his removal. Furthermore why is it that VOD can not provide a single example of me lying about him? I would love to see this supposed lie. As far as being a "service to the community", how does this not qualify as him abusing his position? Clearly according to VOD it does give him power, the power to attack anyone who criticizes him with default negative trust in an attempt to silence them. Also, again, shockingly the staff have no comment on yet another clear cut abuse of the trust system from VOD.