Quote from: Lauda on May 27, 2019, 10:00:08 AM

Nutildah won't be tagged solely because slimy hypocrites asked for him to get tagged after he started speaking out against them.

Sometimes I think you post just for my personal amusement. I know, I know, that's a bit grandiose - your posts have been getting funnier lately, though.
How about they get tagged solely for the reason you've listed in my feedback? EDIT: NOT AN ACTUAL REQUEST! Do I really need to label everything so it's not willfully misinterpreted?

Code:

Account sales encourage scams, spam, and account farming.

We're asking you for consistency, not revenge, Kitty-Queen. What if I say please? Please.

Quote from: Quickseller on May 27, 2019, 04:36:32 AM

AFAIK, he is one person who has been consistent in this regard.

I haven't been able to find any others. Even some of the members that have left me negative trust and excluded me are including and have left positive trust for people like Nutildah.
I don't care to bring Nutildah down; they sincerely believe that their inability to sell their legendary account with positive feedback makes the act acceptable. I think, that's a weak leg to stand on.

Quote from: The Pharmacist on May 27, 2019, 04:55:30 AM

I'm not going to tag anybody in 2019 for an account sale in 2016.

It's so refreshing to be able to take someone at their word.

Theymos has said that negative trust should be reserved for those that you believe are scammers, and my negative feedback is unwarranted for exactly this reason.
You all know that I am not a scammer, and you are taking advantage of a situation to tag me specifically where you have given others a pass for worse offenses.

Quote from: unibitcoinist on May 27, 2019, 03:36:39 AM

I don't think you too have the so called "double standard" here.

We're waiting for proof of their "double standard". Where have they contradicted themselves on this?