Quote from: The Pharmacist on January 25, 2019, 06:54:25 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 25, 2019, 06:17:54 AM

Again, rather than even attempt to engage in a discussion about the topic you jump right into grand inquisitor mode. Thanks for proving my point. We don't need people like this lording over the whole fucking forum on a whim.

And rather than be on the losing end of the argument, you resort to blaming me for presenting facts and start playing the victim. Let's face it, when someone disagrees with you, you go on the attack. This is why I had to block your PMs, because you wanted to keep arguing with me about something I don't even recall, and after that you left the feedback I quoted--which was clearly the kind of personal attack that you're criticizing DT members of engaging in.

Your own words back up my claims, and if anyone reading this wants further proof they ought to check out the link in my previous post.

Do you think the DT list would be better with you on it?

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 25, 2019, 06:05:47 AM

Anyone without a reputation is simply dismissed as a scammer and anyone with a reputation has something you can leverage over them to force compliance.

Furthermore it ends up being little more than noise actual larger frauds can hide behind in the chaos of all the conflict.

Neither of these statements are true. There are plenty of members who've earned positive reputations starting from having no rep in the time I've been here. Jet Cash, Coolcryptovator, marlboroza, Hhampuz, ICOEthics, xtraelv, coinlocket$, and Lafu are among the new batch of DT1 members and they all registered after me. None of these members were dismissed as scammers. What I see is members like them tagging actual scammers.

As to the second part, what larger frauds have been hidden behind "the chaos of all the conflict"? Seems to me that DT has done a pretty decent job tagging the scammers who need tagging. On our own time, without pay, and with much criticism I might add.

Actually the way I see it I honored my principles and only left you a neutral rating, for much of the same behavior you are demonstrating right now I might add. How many negative ratings do you shotgun out in a day? I am sure each of them was dutifully researched first right?

"None of these members were dismissed as scammers."

What are you even arguing? Because some people are not scammers no people gaining reputation this way are scammers? That makes sense how?

"What I see is members like them tagging actual scammers."

What you see is subjective. If they are such scammers you shouldn't have much trouble documenting evidence of a crime, violation of a contractual agreement, or violation of a law. Anything else just allows for arbitrary power tripping which you and others have just demonstrated you are quite fond of.