Quote from: TECSHARE on July 13, 2015, 02:25:16 PM

Yes, of course more about me. Who knew that was coming. Hilariousandco, you are a child with no self control. Every criticism of you is an attack. You are incapable of having a non-confrontational conversation with people, especially when some one dares to tell you that you are wrong. Make up all the shit you like and tell yourself I am everything you say I am. It doesn't change the fact that you act like a huge asshole to people constantly, and eventually everyone will witness your behavior. You are little more than a troll with authority.

So you didn't actually refute any of my points there and instead just essentially used some ad homonyms which is a petty way to actually avoid making a relevant argument. All you've really said is you think I'm an asshole. Well the feeling is mutual, but you only think I'm an asshole because when you requested I defend you I didn't and I continued to make my arguments why you were wrong for some time, and you didn't like this. You also can't really call me a child with no self-control when you cannot control yourself from posting in every thread about someone leaving justified feedback, which you only started doing after you fell foul of the system. It's funny how you only started to distrust me and my ratings were suddenly inaccurate after your incident, and that's why this is all about you. You only messaged me in the first place to help defend you because we'd previously worked together to do some 'scambusting' which you now apparently hate. Whether it's me, vod, QS or someone else all you contribute is snarky and pointless remarks and I only react to criticism against me when it isn't valid and provide reasons why it isn't. Your only invalid arguments here are fueled by your distaste of the trust system after you were removed and your only point of attack is that you somehow think calling me an asshole and vod 2.0 is an insult or is going to get at me. It isn't, I'll take it as a complement from you if anything.

Quote from: TECSHARE on July 13, 2015, 02:25:16 PM

You even said in the rating for the guy it was likely he was just naive.

No I didn't. I said at the very least he's naive, but it's that naivety that makes him untrustworthy regardless of whether his intention was to scam or not and that's why the feedback is justified (and I said I may remove it anyway but I'm not going to remove it just because you say so). You yourself said he was untrustworthy so there isn't really a problem here but you're making it out to be one because it suites your hypocritical anti-trust crusade. A random user coming here and asking for a 1btc loan to put in a ponzi because they think they can double their money is also either scammy or naive, but regardless if he genuinely believes he can double his money and would send you your share back he deserves negative feedback and I'm sure you'll agree, but you likely don't want to leave feedback for this sort of stuff because you can't be arsed dealing with the fallout so you're likely just a coward and/or doesn't want the hassle of threads like these, but you'll denigrate others like me and vod for trying to do the right thing whilst abusing the feedback system yourself for your own petty personal matters.

Quote from: TECSHARE on July 13, 2015, 02:25:16 PM

Quickseller has even backed off and changed his to a neutral. The fact that Quickseller thinks it is appropriate to do so, yet you still resist, is quite telling. So is the fact that you insist on continuing to mark everyone you don't trust. I don't trust you, should I mark you red? Why shouldn't I mark everyone I don't trust red? It will save noobs from themselves!

I don't mark everyone I don't trust. As stated numerous times I rarely leave feedback, but I've either left neutral or no feedback at all then gone on to regret it when that person then went on to scam. I only started leaving negative for no-namers who offer escrow recently after much deliberation because I didn't before and then that person scammed, and many more people will get scammed in the future if we accept them with open arms and just have a giggle at their naivety, but care to actually go through my feedback and tell me which ones of them are inaccurate or out of order (create a new thread if you like but I'd also like you to go through tomatocage's and tell me why they're all justified too)? And you might not trust me but you've got no reason to believe I was going to scam anyone so why would you leave me negative? Amis didn't scam you either but that didn't stop you from marking him with red and that's why you are a massive hypocrite because apparently leaving negative feedback when you're being trolled is ok, but leaving feedback for someone who is a scammer or having strong scammy behavior is over-stepping the mark.

Quote from: TECSHARE on July 13, 2015, 06:50:33 PM

I think your actions are appropriate. This is the difference between going around spraying and praying with ratings and actually critically examining your ratings such as people like Tomatocage. This war mentality against people who likely just don't have a clue how things work here needs to change. It doesn't serve anyone (except the trust vigilantes).

I only mentioned you Quickseller because you are some one who regularly gets accused of going too far with your ratings, and even you are reconsidering, putting Hilariousandco below your standard, which is the telling part to me. You don't always make the right call but you (usually) will reconsider ratings if some logic can be presented. The rate at which Hilariousandco has been leaving negative ratings has accelerated lately. It seems to me Hilariousandco wants to be Vod v2 and just do it shotgun style and not worry about where they stray shots go.

Did you even read anything I said above? I'm sure you did but you've chosen to ignore it all because it's the truth and you don't have an argument to make other than sticking to the hur dur he's vod 2.0 schtick because that's all you've seemingly got at the moment. I've just explained why you're completely wrong about tomatocage so why are you acting like he's a beacon of shining light for leaving trust? You're only holding him up as an example because he hasn't done anything to annoy you. You can't just ignore the fact that tomatocage leaves ratings which fall under the very things you are accusing me and vod of and in far greater volume than me and there's little to no difference between vod and tomato. It's also worth mentioning that by his own admission tomatocage was an account created to scambust to avoid drawing heat to his main account from scammers crying about it so it's funny that apparently I'm a trust vigilante scambuster but he isn't. He's only not that because he didn't get involved in your spat.

Anyway, I doubt you'll actually respond with anything of merit and just stick to the you're an asshole and vod 2.0 lines and continue being a hypocrite about everything but feel free to create a thread where we can discuss why mine or tomotacage's feedbacks are appropriate or not or why they're somehow any better than mine, or, you should just get over yourself and what happened when you abused the feedback system you're now constantly rallying against because it was old months ago and it's only getting more pathetic as time goes on.

Quote from: stingers on July 13, 2015, 07:08:20 PM

Well if you feel in that way then giving out a negative trust is justified.
But along with it, this also reflects the conservative mindset of the community and dis confidence on each other.
There is something very wrong with the community(particularly with a few members, hilarious excluded).

This forum is not a beautiful hippie libertarian utopia. It has lots of trustworthy and noble people but it also has many more people who would steal a dollar off you if they had the chance. Some people might steal a dollar off you as soon as they can or they might steal a thousand later when they've built up enough confidence from you and that's why people shouldn't have confidence in random no-rep people on the internet, and that's why we use escrows, but those escrows need to be highly trusted. Their reputation should be their bond and their name should mean more to them than a few bitcoins. A lot of these no-namers who offer escrow come in and act like they should just be given a chance and build up their rep as they go along and if they don't scam on their first go they'll say "Hey look at me, I'm trustworthy", but that's now how things work and for good reason. Whether they're simply naive and have good intentions or have the intention to scam at some point they're not to be trusted as escrows and leaving negative on them as harsh as you may think it is is helping to protect the community, but sometimes life is harsh and people need to know what should and shouldn't be accepted here and offering to hold onto others money when you've got no good reason to isn't acceptable in my opinion regardless of being naive or not. People can continue to be hypocrites and cowards like tecshare but people definitely shouldn't be vilified for leaving these sorts of feedback especially when they do nothing themselves but whinge and try to take the moral high ground but continually contradicting themselves in the process.