Quote from: Jet Cash on February 18, 2019, 03:05:26 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on February 18, 2019, 01:14:42 PM

Jet Cash, that is easy for some one who does little to no trade here to declare.

I'd love it if it was related to trading honesty. It is so complex at the moment, that I wouldn't know how to use it to evaluate a potential trading partner. It would be easier just to read the post history to form an opinion.

I agree, it is not only overly complex, it is actually counter productive to its intended goals. I also agree reading ratings would be a better use of the system, which is why I am advocating for a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws before negative rating, and teaching users to do due diligence.

Quote from: nutildah on February 18, 2019, 01:41:49 PM

Can you explain why this matters so much to you that you've talking about it every day for months?

I already directly answered your question to you elsewhere before, but hey lets all pretend like none of you have had answers to these questions already.

Quote from: TECSHARE on February 14, 2019, 07:23:37 AM

My problem is I don't want to be subject to a system of arbitrary enforcement, stalking, and abuse that is the standard around here. This is creating an extremely caustic environment on the forum and is destroying the core of the community from the inside out. The trust system as it is, is wide open for scammers and trolls to slide right in and make is user base tear itself apart as we have seen so many examples of.

I am being so vocal about this because I am one of the FEW cases where these complaints can not simply be dismissed as some kind of scammer trying to cover up their crimes which is standard operating procedure any time a complaint is made. I am one of the few people that is willing to step forward and risk harassment by these entrenched abusers in the current system. For the most part everyone doesn't want to get involved because they fear retribution themselves, but the problem with that is it lets the abusers run the forum. I don't intend to stand by quietly and allow this to happen like most of the rest of the forum unwilling to take the risk of speaking up.

Quote from: ScumBuster on February 18, 2019, 04:05:23 PM

>Posts endless personal attacks and bickering
>Complains about personal attacks and bickering

Sock puppets now? You are taking the moral high ground from a sock puppet now? This is how desperate these people are to hold on to their control and have no accountability. They don't even want the accountability of confronting me so they don't have to look like they are trying too hard.

The difference is I want to engage in a logical discussion, and I have. I suppose I should be stoic and stand silent while I get mobbed so I can meet your standards better eh Mr. Sock Puppet who is totally not part of the trust cartel?

Quote from: suchmoon on February 18, 2019, 02:04:40 PM

I tried to figure out a way for your "standards" to be enforced and all I got back from you was that I'm feigning ignorance. If you're unable to support your proposal with very basic details ("how would it work") then you deserve all the ridicule you get.

BTW "you know you can't succeed" doesn't sound like a good premise for a discussion. This might be one of many reasons why you're not being taken seriously.

Actually you got several explanations from me which you continually pretend don't exist. Here is another one of them quoted below. I have repeatedly attempted discussion with you and you repeatedly demonstrate you would rather play games and side track the discussion. This demonstrates to me among other things your inability to counter the logic of the argument itself.

Quote from: TECSHARE on February 17, 2019, 04:15:39 AM

Your assertion that Theymos will be required to officiate over every dispute is false, and provably so. Does Theymos currently run around enforcing the "guideline" that it is not acceptable to leave ratings for disagreeing with people's opinions every time some one does this? No, of course not. People point out to them that it is not acceptable and either they change it or they lose their own reputation and or are excluded. You can have both, because we already have both. The only difference is the standard becomes more exclusive, and less open to interpretation leading to less disputes and selective enforcement.

We need a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws before negative rating.