Quote from: Bardman on April 04, 2018, 02:00:35 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on April 04, 2018, 04:18:53 AM

Quote from: Bardman on March 25, 2018, 11:04:11 PM

He probably didn't want to get his normal account red tagged because as we all know, it usually happens when you try to attack DT1 or highly trusted members. That being said, some of the yahoo's old posts seem quite worrying to me. It is definitely hypocritical to tag sold accounts when he was selling and also trying to build up reputation. Then again, I doubt anything bad will happen to him with the info you provided.

His "normal" account is already red-tagged the wazoo, so no, this is just the opposite - trying to make it look like more users are joining Quicksy's vendettas.

The whole idea that if you tag someone for something then you have to tag everyone who's done the same thing is one big fallacy. Despite Blazed owning 12% of DT or whatever, the remaining 88% could easily tag those users if they choose to do so. So again, Quicksy is just throwing a fit like a 3-year old who didn't get his ice cream for breakfast.

''The whole idea that if you tag someone for something then you have to tag everyone who's done the same thing is one big fallacy.'' Why is that a big fallacy? You would be abusing your power if you only tagged people that you wanted to. If you agree that account sellers should be tagged then all of them should be tagged otherwise what's the point of trust ratings.

If you see things as black and white when they clearly aren't, then there is a very obvious fallacy (false binary) present.

Quote from: Bardman on April 04, 2018, 02:00:35 PM

If anyone can do whatever they want then we might as well not have a trust rating system.

That's pretty much how it has been recently more or less (see recent collusion to exclude people you disagree with and whatnot); well, at least for those who abuse it. Theymos rarely steps in (next to never), which makes it even worse.