Re: Remove VOD from the Default Trust List - clear case of neg for calling out abuse
leaving a reference is not required. The op has started a number of threads (some through shills) trying to get Vod removed from default trust list.
I find it somewhat suspicious that the op is so adamant about wanting to be on default trust.
I find it somewhat suspicious that the op is so adamant about wanting to be on default trust.
This is again another fabrication. I never once requested to be added to the default trust list, not even the first time I was on it. All I was doing was pointing out the glaringly obvious selective enforcement of rules by the staff where they apply only to people like me, but do not apply to people like VOD. Considering that these rules are completely unwritten, I am not sure how I could have possibly known what they are except BY EXAMPLE, set by people... like VOD. The lack of action here by the staff is clear evidence of his protected position regardless of how much he abuses the trust system. People might think I am a pain in the ass around here, and that is ok with me, but what I AM NOT is a liar or a scammer, and I think most people reading this know that.
Vod, you didn't leave a reference thread in your rating of Techshare.
I'd like to see some of those links.
leaving a reference is not required. The op has started a number of threads (some through shills) trying to get Vod removed from default trust list. I'd like to see some of those links.
I find it somewhat suspicious that the op is so adamant about wanting to be on default trust. Your position as being on default trust means that any time you leave a negative you will be harassed by the receiver. Being on default trust is a service to the community (assuming you do not abuse your position). It is not something that earns any additional power.
As demonstrated in the op's case, if you abuse your position in default trust then you will be removed.
Vod does a service by calling out scams and preventing less experienced traders from getting scammed.
This is absolute bullshit. I did no such thing. You can build whatever fake narratives you like to defend him, but I have only one account here and have never used shills or even attempted to get VOD removed from the default trust list until now (after he left me negative feedback for pointing out his abuse). Like VOD doesn't start enough of his own shit that I need to get shills to attack him. PLEASE
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.You know what I find suspicious? That you find yourself here slandering a person that has been arguing for the removal of the default trust system, basically, if put into effect, putting your peddling of other user's trust out of operation because they will all have the same ranking and people will not pay as much for them if anything.