Re: Plagiarism apologist #92110 “cryptohunter” rationalized dishonesty in principle

Quote from: nullius on January 01, 2020, 10:29:38 PM

I did not intend for the following to be a post. It started as a simple observation on the trustworthiness of a user, then grew into an opinion that I think should set precedent in what is effectually the Bitcoin Forums common law on use the trust system.

In that light, I must emphasize the narrowness this opinion. I think it would be a massively destructive abuse of the trust system to use it to, say, punish people for their political opinions. The trust system is in effect an economic weapon; and the use of economic weapons to enforce groupthink is odious. E.g., nowadays, there are places where you can be fired from your job for using the correct pronouns, or making simple, factual observations about realitylet alone expressing the wrong opinions.

In the general case, if I see on this forum an opinion that I think is wrong, even horribly wrong, my reaction is either to say why its wrong, or to ignore it as garbage. I may sometimes personally avoid transacting with people I disagree with, in the manner of a quiet boycott; but there are even many people on this forum whose opinions I find disagreeable, with whom I would have no qualms about transacting financially.

By contrast, what I hereby consider is an opinion that directly, unavoidably, substantively demonstrates the untrustworthiness of he who expresses it. Is it untrustworthy behaviour to demand that scammy, dishonest people should not be shamed? I say, yes!

It would be interesting to see some intelligent analysis and critique. I admit its arguable whether this is a good idea, for I am walking a thin, dangerous line. However, I sincerely, unarguably, and unalterably distrust this user, for the reasons stated below; and what is the purpose of the trust system, if it is not for expressing a well-founded distrust so as to warn others?

[The following is what I intended to use as a trust comment. It invoked an error: Comment too long. Create a topic and link to it instead. A draft was saved. In my actual trust rating, it will be replaced with a link to this topic.]

Quote from: nullius

In the linked post and subsequent posts on the same thread, #92110 cryptohunter rationalized and morally minimized plagiarism. He did this with no apparent direct self-interest; judging only by the thread on its face, he appears to have done this to protect plagiarists from shame *as a matter of principle*. #92110 admits that plagiarists need to be banned, but vehemently objects to shaming them with ridicule. For the purpose of judging trustworthiness, all this only makes him worse.

A.

Unlike copyright law violations, plagiarism is truly the theft of ideas. It is singularly the most reprehensible wrong that can be committed within the realm of the intellect; and it is inherently fraudulent, an intellectual scam by definition.

Thus, anybody who defends, excuses, or morally minimizes plagiarism in principle is *ipso facto* untrustworthy. Anybody who considers plagiarism not shameful is definitely untrustworthy. And this applies a thousandfold to anybody who attempts to manipulate the emotional sympathies of the public to stop social shaming of plagiarists: It is no less than an attempt to protect fraudulent criminals by depriving a community of a needed weapon, i.e. social shame, that the community uses to defend itself.

Perhaps worst of all in concept, this last is hereby seen done via a values inversion that shames the people who are shaming dishonest, fraudulent plagiarists. Further down the thread, #92110 even has the audacity to issue a preachy, self-righteous tirade disparaging and ridiculing the moral compass and critical decision making capabilities of The Pharmacist: The latter has no sympathy for poor, desperate plagiarists who are being deterred by public shaming from the forum and its financial opportunities. Evidently, he expects for The Pharmacist to be ashamed. (I do not hereby reach #92110s other arguments, other to note that they are are completely wrong.)

B.

There are instances in which a disagreeable opinion is just that, and reveals little or nothing about the trustworthiness of the holder of that opinion for financial transactions. I absolutely would not issue a negative trust rating in those instances. This is not one of those instances. The linked post is tantamount to a self-righteous declaration that even though [scammers] need to be banned I can't say I have no idea why they do this, and they shouldnt be shamed for ripping people off, especially if they are poor as fuck or have semi legit reasons (!).

Indeed, substitute the word scammer for plagiarist in the context of the linked discussion, and you will immediately see why I have chosen to tag #92110 as untrustworthy for financial transactions. I would not trust a plagiarism apologist with even a millisatoshi.

Coda

I see that #92110 is accused by others of abusing alts. If/when I have time for the needed investigation, I should issue a negative trust rating to any alts that I independently verify actually belong to the same person(s). Its low on my priorities list, but I hope that I will get to it eventually.

Archival link:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200101215600/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5084319.0;all

What an obvious scammer supporting shit stain we have here.

1. noobius does not have a miilisatoshi so it matters little to cryptohunter we are sure

2. this dumb fuck expects us to believe he scanned through all of cryptohunters posts failed to notice that he missed the part where CH demonstrated clearly demonstrated that undeniable scammers that were far more financially high risk than these turd word desperados were celebrating their punishment which in many cases seemed very heavy handed. WHEN THESE SAME scammers were begging for their pal chibitchity to be REINSTATED for deliberate sneaky financially motivated plagiarism.

I mean noobius likes to sound smart, but reveals himself clearly as a fucking hypocrite and shit stain scammer supporter. Where are the red tags on the proven scammers and willing scam facilitators that CH spend the last part of his posts highlighting??

The point CH was clearly making (and only really for instances where the "copy and paste" bullshit looked either innocent or NOT for direct financial gain ) is that bunches of scammers and scammer supporters sitting around making up bingo games regarding excuses from copy and past nothing burgers whilst themselves posing far greater financial danger to the forum was HYPOCRISY.

This noobius is clearly the one demonstrating he is UNTRUSTWORTHY and a far greater danger to the forum. Get red flagging the people on the dirty turds thread noobius you moronic piece of shit.

Nice to put this fucktard in our sights though and see his true colors. Look forward to plenty of public destruction scumbag. Fancy words and " sounding smart" won't stop us pulling you apart in debate.

Look forward to your own thread noobius.

Those that SPEND THEIR TIME looking to punish small time petty shit whilst IGNORING the more dangerous scammers here are the REAL scumbags. Noobius is one of those.

Some say lauda controls the nullius account. That seems plausible both like to "sound" smart whilst it is easy to crush their stupid minds in real debate. Fancy over done wordy posts mean nothing once you start pulling them apart piece by piece.

Glad we have another dreg to pull apart and crush whenever we like. Well another alt of some idiot like lauda anyway.

Hurry up and flag this account this is to serve as a honey pot for all the scammers and scammer supporters here.

What is EVEN more amusing about this is that noobius does not notice that those making the bingo and taking the piss out of SOME MEMBERS that were banned for copy and paste that WAS not financially motivated, and was just some copy and paste of their own projects twitter annoucements or some other non financially motivated and helpful copy and paste ....THOSE SAME PEOPLE were BEGGING for the REINSTATEMENT of their pal chibitchity or whatever the fuck this campaign scammers name was WHO ADMITTED HE COPY AND PASTE FOR FINANCIAL GAIN. LOL

I see people here are easily swayed by noobius flowery waffle. He is a fucking computer nerd that can push out some flowery crap that "sounds impressive" to idiots.
Watch how we will crush this fucking scumbag in real debate.

He is misrepresenting and pulling CH's words out of their full context. Whilst demonstrating his purpose is NOT to increase the safety of members here at all. He glances straight past the far more damning and dangerous actions of his scamming pals like lauda (who is awarding nullius 20 merits) LOL

LOOK at robovac still crying with his 20 merits that CH demonstrated clearly

1. he is a 1 trick raw stats pony who starts crying when CH smashed its dumb face in on the merit cycling debates
2. a stupid bitch who kisses up to tmans swearing , cursing and generally low level tourettes laded spew then cries trolling and tears any anyone else who is "rude"

Oh look a self moderated thread. That is supposed to be a big no no here ....well when it suits them.

Noobius?? who??? who the fuck is this guy? can you bring his big achievements here please so we can have a good laugh at them?? just another nobody

A fucking NOBODY with some flowery shit nerd speak to impress idiots. Sounding smart to imbeciles is one thing. This noob fool even daring to mention a real achiever like CH is a joke. Go sell your polished gibberish elsewhere cos we will expose it for the low functioning spew it is.