Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
⭐ Merited by TECSHARE (1)
indeed, i used "established" as a verb and then you mischaracterized it to mean an "established fact".
still a mischaracterization: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/establish
and who the fuck cares about this? you've yet to address why you are continuing to distract from the discussion with this completely unimportant tangent.
"Care" is a strong word. I'm merely enjoying the sheer hypocrisy of the "standards" gang being so reckless with their facts. Relax, you're in good company. TECSHARE is also refusing to substantiate his wild claims.still a mischaracterization: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/establish
and who the fuck cares about this? you've yet to address why you are continuing to distract from the discussion with this completely unimportant tangent.
which wild claim was that---that there are scam busters on DT with mutual self inclusions? i think that's fairly self-evident and not worth arguing over, but we can agree to disagree. it's an opinion, and i don't mind being associated with it.
i don't think that implies that i'm "reckless with facts" but it's cute how you're now piling on ad hominems so you can continue distracting from the actual topic.
as a reminder, the issue is whether claims related to negative trust feedback are substantiated. the issue is not whether "every opinion figmentofmyass expresses" is substantiated.
should i pick apart every sentence you utter, asking you to "substantiate" everything you say? this is the height of false equivalence! i'm asking for people to substantiate their claims regarding negative trust, not meet ridiculous standards for every opinion they express when writing a post on bitcointalk.
if you had anything useful to say, you would address the topic---whether there should be objective standards regarding the trust system, whether DT negative trust should require any standards whatsoever, etc---rather than distracting with ridiculous off-topic tangents, fallacies, and ad hominem attacks.
I would suggest TS placing a passage of text saying these are my optional and entirely personal lists for your consideration. Do your own research to determine if you consider them useful guides.
+1.