Quote from: TECSHARE on January 29, 2020, 06:06:16 AM

Quote from: Vod on January 29, 2020, 05:05:59 AM

...

...doxing and supposedly reporting OGNasty to the IRS...

TECSHARE, I am not a bull before whom a red flag can be waved (as I noticed one of your supporters recently also tried on another threadmuch more subtly). Unlike some here, I will not take your bait.

Vods negative feedback on TECSHARE, dated 2019-09-09 and now (together with Laudas negative) supported by me via my counter-counter tag, states:

Quote from: Vod

This profile has fundamentally abused the trust system, trading positive trust with as many others as possible to get on Default Trust. See reference and the BPIP DT Change Log for examples. Do not trust this profile's trust of others by adding ~TECSHARE to your personal trust list.

That is a serious accusation! I immediately checked Vods reference link, which I will hereby quote in full because people seem to be ignoring its significance in the context of this thread (see post title):

Quote from: nutildah on September 07, 2019, 11:25:11 AM

Quote from: Vod on September 07, 2019, 08:52:26 AM

Quote

What changed, is that TECHSHARE reached DT1 (strength 0 instead of negative) a few hours ago (https://bpip.org/r/dt1changes.aspx).

Yeah, for the last few weeks he has been putting aside his morals and belief structure to get back on DT. He stopped distrusting everyone and started trusting many others, hoping for retaliatory trust. It was a good example for Theymos to see just how easily idiots can get on DT right now.

This is correct. TECSHARE has been trying to get reciprocal inclusions for a few months now. Its finally paid off. The DT1s that he has nothing in common with except for reciprocal inclusions are:

WhiteManWhite (Russian local board poster)
Kalemder (Turkish local board poster)
bobita (Turkish local board poster)
Matthias9515 (Turkish local board poster) (left a positive trust for TS on 6/29, was added by TS a month later, during the first week that Matthias was on DT1)
mhanbostanci (Turkish local board poster)

He's never interacted with these users as they all post exclusively on their local boards (except when they make the exception to visit Meta or Reputation to address trust-related issues). I'm going to assume that he doesn't speak enough Russian or Turkish to understand the ratings left by these users and (for the most part) they don't speak enough English to understand his, and the only reason he included them was to gain enough votes to be back out of the negatives on DT. Without them, he would be back at -4.

He also included two other Turkish posters soon after they were added to DT1, PHI1618 and by rallier whom he subsequently dropped (I imagine it was for not getting the reciprocal trust he was hoping for)

He's still waiting for Vispilio to reciprocate, probably unaware that he just fell off DT1 for not having the minimum number of inclusions.

Outside of OP's issue with ABitNut, this is exactly the kind of behavior that should be discouraged in the DT system.

Now, trust-system abuser TECSHARE, who dishonestly reached DT1 through vote-trading, has opened against me a hit-thread laced with subtextual panic that I may honestly and properly soon reach DT1. (Insofar as I can tell, I am indeed eligible.) TECSHAREs basis for accusing me of trust-system abuse: My support of Vods tag correctly identifying him as a trust-system abuser (among other good tags).

Wherefore:

Quote from: Vod on January 29, 2020, 07:56:12 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 29, 2020, 06:06:16 AM

You have been using the trust system as a tool of retribution. Hypocrite!

The word hypocrite is hereby inadequate. The English language needs a word specific to covering for ones own crimes by accusing ones accusers.

Quote from: Vod on January 29, 2020, 07:56:12 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 29, 2020, 06:06:16 AM

You among all people on this forum have no business criticizng anyone for abuse of the trust system with your years long history of abuse of dozens if not hundreds of people.

You mean my scam busting?

I have indeed observed that TECSHARE indeed has an interesting definition of the word abuse: Busting abusers.

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 28, 2020, 02:37:34 AM

N.b. the pattern of accusing others of arbitrarily redefining or misconstruing words as he arbitrarily redefines or misconstrues words to the opposite of their actual meanings, to his advantage. See my above remark about a needed neologism. Is there a philologist in the house?

Quote from: nullius on January 27, 2020, 11:41:22 AM

The great truths of this world are oft concealed in the twisting of language. A warrior-philologist is armed with the sword to slice through this Gordian knot...

He further observes that good in the Master-Morality is evil in the Slave-Morality, and good in the Slave-Morality is bad in the Master-Morality (e.g., liberals and Christians). In my own words, the former is a morality of pride, and the latter is a morality of utility: A morality of ability serving needs, thus that the meek shall inherit the earth.

TECSHARE tends to present himself as if he were a spokesman for the oppressed, with typical pinko agitprop that portrays wrongdoers as mass-victims:

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 23, 2020, 11:01:41 PM

Why would anyone pressure yahoo6278 to stop supporting Yobit when they can just use the pretext of stopping Yobit to lord over thousands of random users and use this activity to boost their own "scambusting" profile? I mean, yahoo62278 washes all the right balls, and acheiving their stated goals of stopping Yobit doesn't seem that great compared to all the random users they can lord over and have beg them for forgiveness instead of targeting the one person most able to stop Yobit on this forum. How are they going to exploit thousands of users with arbitrary enforcement if they go after one of their pals? Nah, they will just stick to harassing random unsuspecting users for some shit they excuse their buddies from.

For an extra-special touch of some thing beyond hypocrisy, this TECSHARE quote is from a thread that I myself opened for the exact purpose of pressuring yahoo6278 to stop supporting Yobitin which my OP, my follow-up post, and even the topic title all seem to nearly shout that if I were to have started mass-tagging Yobit advertisers while yahoo was running their campaign and wearing their signature, I myself would have tagged yahoo first as a matter of principle. Perhaps someone forgot to wash my balls?

And this same principle is why I have told suchmoon to either ~Vod with ~nullius, or back off. Laudas example of achow101 is also consistent with this principle.

I am not hiding behind Vod. I can stand on my own feet; and indeed, at this point, I would independently stand on principle even if, hypothetically, Vod were less principled than he obviously is. However, wise judgment requires first pursuing the biggest, toughest targets, as well as getting to the root of an alleged problem. Arguendo, if my support of Vods tag is wrong, then Vods tag is wrong: Start at the root of the problem before rattling your sabre at me. Whereas I will not be cowed by the threat of exclusionespecially not when the same threat is not also made against a 5-digit UID with one of the highest trust weights, whose tag it is that I so happen to be supporting because it is right.

(The same argument also separately applies to my support of Laudas tag. I am only picking on Vod because suchmoon includes him. Sorry, Vod.)