Re: Who is the little bitch who added that POS Quickseller to default trust again?
-snip-
Techshare is correct in "BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES AND IGNORE CLEAR INSTANCES OF ABUSE TO PROTECT THOSE WITHIN THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUE"
Quickseller / Dogie / Muhammed Zakir are a quite the little echo chamber... there is a long list of these sorts of people being given preferential treatment while others are held to to the "letter" of the law. Seen it too many times across too many threads maybe it is time for Theymos to clean house a bit.
Techshare is correct in "BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES AND IGNORE CLEAR INSTANCES OF ABUSE TO PROTECT THOSE WITHIN THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUE"
Quickseller / Dogie / Muhammed Zakir are a quite the little echo chamber... there is a long list of these sorts of people being given preferential treatment while others are held to to the "letter" of the law. Seen it too many times across too many threads maybe it is time for Theymos to clean house a bit.
I knew it.
When I posted in mprep's thread, I knew you would drag me into this. I am not willing to discuss about your theories in this thread because that will be an endless discussion. I am post here to ask how is TECSHARE's words applies to me? I am not in DF, not a staff or a person who have power and is not a person who is highly trusted. I am also not a spammer. How is staff protecting me?I just wanted to comment that even though Muhammed Zakir is very opinionated, so much so he might not think everything though as much as he should, but IMO he is a reasonable person. We had a momentary conflict but it was easily resolved with a short private discussion. I don't believe he belongs grouped in with the others you mentioned. I don't really find him abusive (at least not that I have witnessed).
I primarily do not trust the negative ratings that you leave. Although I also don't trust the positive ratings you leave for people like WC (who is pretty clearly a scammer).
Yeah but, which actual ratings do you find questionable? I didn't just leave WC a positive rating, I transacted with him and he delivered what was promised. Why shouldn't I leave him a positive rating for that? It is not like it changes much anyway.
As far as negative ratings, I have left 13 total in the 4 years I have been trading here. Of those 13, 10 were for unique users (some users I left negatives for twice, usually as an update due to their activities). Of those 10 users, 6 were marked negative by other high ranking members for their fraudulent or questionable activities (confirming that others agree the negative trust was justified). Of the four remaining users I left ratings for, one was left for some one who skipped out on a loan from me, one was left for a user that decided to dox an Infinitecoin development team member with no cause or reason because he was angry that he was hacked by a 3rd party, two were left for Nubbins for negative rating me for being critical of his behavior, and the last one was left for Armis for harassing me in my own market place threads. Which of these ratings do you find questionable?
I try to only leave ratings (positive or negative) for people I have personally transacted with, or at least have had some direct interaction with. I don't hand out ratings as favors or use them as a tool to harass people I don't agree with. I consider myself one of the more conservative users of the trust system. You have on the other hand left more negative ratings than I have the free time to count, many of them questionable, and that is just on one account. I am not sure you are the person to criticize my use of trust ratings.