Quote from: suchmoon on February 05, 2019, 07:11:31 PM

Quote from: theymos on February 05, 2019, 07:06:50 PM

Quote from: asche on February 05, 2019, 07:01:39 PM

However if he tried to actually "game" the system to his advantage (not saying he did) should THAT be tagged?

With gaming the system I mean influencing DT list for his own sake or agenda and not for legitimate reasons. See Thule et al.

If the "gaming" takes the form of strategically sending a lot of merit, creating sockuppets, and stuff like that, then no. That sort of gaming might get me to blacklist people, in fact. But if it looks more like politics, then that's OK, and that's what H8bussesNbicycles's thread looks like to me.

Is stingers still a merit source? Sending merits to pad H8's gang to 10 merits so that they would have votes. Not sure if that counts as "strategic".

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988.msg49590110#msg49590110

Theymos gave already the answer its legit if it comes from free will of real users.
Stinger has posted that he have been abused in the past in his opinion and wishes changes.To achieve changes some people need to get voted up.If sending Merit to people you wish to move up would be forbidden how do you ever wanna implement a communities DT list when majority of merit is being hold by a very small group.

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 05, 2019, 07:23:05 PM

Quote from: theymos on February 05, 2019, 07:06:50 PM

Quote from: asche on February 05, 2019, 07:01:39 PM

However if he tried to actually "game" the system to his advantage (not saying he did) should THAT be tagged?

With gaming the system I mean influencing DT list for his own sake or agenda and not for legitimate reasons. See Thule et al.

If the "gaming" takes the form of strategically sending a lot of merit, creating sockuppets, and stuff like that, then no. That sort of gaming might get me to blacklist people, in fact. But if it looks more like politics, then that's OK, and that's what H8bussesNbicycles's thread looks like to me.

I might not understand when self-moderation is appropriate.

I have no problem with your (theymos) conclusion that "H8bussesNbicycles's thread looks like [politics] to me", but isn't there a bit of a problem with the self-moderation aspect of certain kinds of threads, especially when dealing with seemingly meta issues?

For example, I had 6 posts deleted from that thread (so of course, now I don't even attempt to participate or pay attention, since I could not even contribute if I wanted to, except if I were to exclude Lauda from my trust list, then they might allow my posts), and I thought that my posts were innocuous, even though obviously the contents of my posts distracted from the message that they want to promote in that thread (inaccurate as some other members might find such thread messages).

Nobody would delete your post if you would have Lauda in your trust list.
Posts have been deleted which were bashing the action OP started.

You just need to look at my trust feedback.

Having 5 negative feedbacks for the try to support people into DT list which will lead execute the DT responsibility like me and hopefully the majority of forum members see.
If we wouldn't be allowed to support our view what sense would it make that theymos created a decentralised voting system.
Current DT members have already the advantage of high merits and sticking togther.

Here the 5 people who tagged me for that thread

Timelord2067: Conspiring to manipulate DT for a personal vendetta at the risk of leaving other users vulnerable to known scammers.
yogg: Conspiring to manipulate DT for a personal vendetta at the risk of leaving other users vulnerable to known scammers.
TMAN: Conspiring to manipulate DT for a personal vendetta at the risk of leaving other users vulnerable to known scammers.
Foxpup: Conspiring to manipulate DT for a personal vendetta at the risk of leaving other users vulnerable to known scammers.
asche: Complete moron. Basically defends anyone speaking up against any DT member hoping to fuel his attempt to actually manipulate the system.
This user has his own agenda. Do not trust him.

Quote

- You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.

TMAN gave me a year a false negative tagg being the alt of Quickseller.I PM'ed him a few days ago asking him to remove the false negative tagg since after a year he should clearly see i have no relation to quickseller and also offered to remove my negative tagg for tagging with a false reason.
His response was an additional negative tagg.

Thats the kind of actions which is frustrating the community.And TMAN even laughing and making jokes he gave me a negative tagg with the explanation that i might be an alt of Quickseller.

So he has completly no evidence at all.I guess everyone can clearly see there is no relationship and when getting asked to remove the false tagg he adds just for his vendetta on me a second one claiming i run a vendetta on all DT.
Thats just a lie but you don't belive i'm going to support a DT member like TMAN who proofed his negative actions in the past ?