Quote from: nutildah on Today at 05:09:09 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 18, 2020, 10:48:32 PM

Quote from: amishmanish on May 17, 2020, 06:21:33 AM

This whole drama created by a few Turkish members seems to be affecting the Local board overwhelmingly. Most Turkish users are interacting in Local and there view about Global is being manipulated by those caught in scamming activities. They are sowing general discord amongst the community with stupid conspiracy theories. I have been trying to talk with the people over at Turkish local. Here is a step-wise evolution of the matter.

1. REMOVAL OF KALEMDER
The whole thing started because Kalemder was removed from the ChipMixer campaign after he was found to have some "Mutual trust inclusion/ exclusion" affair with TECHSHARE. He says that he did it because he trusted TECHSHARE as he was speaking out against racism.

Bullshit. There was never any shred of evidence to support that idea, and it was based completely on an assumption on Nutilduhh's part, as they later admitted publicly.

Quote from: nutildah on March 02, 2020, 07:59:47 AM

Not at all. You have every much a right to include who you want as I do to assume you were fishing for reciprocal inclusions.

I mediated a dispute between Timelord and some members of the Turkish community, they added me, as a result I ended up back on the default trust list. Being the angry little ass clowns they are, they mobilized to invent several stories across multiple threads simultaneously to try to slander myself and others who had decided to add each other. Not because of mutual inclusions, but because our interaction had cultivated trust.

Liar.

This is the 3rd time I have to correct your lies on this issue. Were you just hoping I wouldn't see this, or what was your plan exactly?

Quote from: nutildah on February 08, 2020, 04:18:14 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on February 08, 2020, 03:47:46 AM

That said, if you review the original thread Vod bases his accusation on, you will see I made an effort to mutually resolve a conflict between members of the Turkish community and Timelord. This lead to several interactions with several of the members of the Turkish community, of which I gained respect for because of how they handled the response. I must assume they felt the same way and this is why they added me. I didn't do anything I wasn't supposed to and these accusations are nothing but a tall tale designed to make sure I wasn't allowed to be put back on the default trust instigated by people with very long time, publicly documented animus against me.

Your timeline is off. The trust trading was happening well before your involvement with Timelord's fake flag bonanza.

The post you linked is dated September 7th, and you were playing trust games with Russian and Turkish local board posters from July through August. The only reason these users were on your radar was because they had recently been promoted to DT1, and like you, were either off or barely hanging on by 1-2 votes. Your other great rationale for adding local board posters is because somebody like Foxpup, suchmoon or myself distrust them, which according to you, "makes them interesting." Still a terrible reason to include someone in your trust list, and evidence you don't belong on DT.

Your first interaction with the Turkish community was on Sept. 7th, 2019.

- In the last week of July 2019, you added by rallier and PHI1618.
- In the week preceding 8/10, you added bobita, helping him to reach DT1 0, and he added you.
- In the week preceding 9/7, you added Kalemder, helping him to reach DT1 1, and he added you.

All of these additions took place before your first comment on the matter. It was because you had added these members to your trust list that you decided to "mediate" their dispute with Timelord, NOT the other way around.

As can be documented by your trust inclusion archive, you have a long history of adding people to your trust list as soon as they become DT1. It's obvious you are fishing for reciprocal inclusions. You're still doing it, BTW.

5/4/2020 10:16:29 PM DaveF is selected into DT1
5/6/2020 1:56:59 AM TECSHARE trusts DaveF

Is it obvious, or just you confirming your bias? Could it be that I am adding people who might have an actual effect on the trust system? Of course not! IT HAS to be because I am "fishing for inclusions". Pay no attention to the fact that he is still there even though he hasn't added me. You are not correcting anything, you are simply repeating your own assumptions, assumptions which I have already responded to many times.

Quote from: TECSHARE on March 02, 2020, 07:35:35 AM

In order to "manufacture timelines", one has to first operate on the assumption that your timeline means anything other than more assumptions on your part. You feel you have some kind of right to not only demand I explain why I included these people, but that it must be done in such a manner commensurate with your demands, or else I am "manufacturing timelines". It is not that you are making baseless assumptions, no, not at all, it is because I am "manufacturing timelines" that my replies don't meet the standards of your demands.

Quote from: TECSHARE on March 01, 2020, 04:04:39 PM

Not only that there were private communications as well, there is also the fact that I thought their trust lists were also positive additions.

Some of the users I added for the simple reason that I agreed with their trust list. Is this where you tell me again what is a valid reason for me deciding who I do or don't include based on your own personal preferences? Nothing you are accusing me of is anything that couldn't literally be applied to any other member actively using custom trust lists. Much like a fed uses process crimes to charge people with crimes when they have no evidence, you are using the idea that I don't meet your arbitrary standards in your interrogation as "proof" of my guilt. This is all just a game you are playing to pursue your own vendetta.

Quote from: nutildah on March 02, 2020, 07:59:47 AM

But since I admittedly can't prove that I know what you were actually thinking or what your actual motivations were, I ask that people look at the body of evidence presented and come to their own conclusions.

Quote from: TECSHARE on March 02, 2020, 12:31:09 PM

There is no "body of evidence". There are a string of assumptions, with accusations stacked on top of them upon which even more assumptions were based. That is not evidence, that is at best theorizing and nothing a trust rating should be based on. Once again, I manufactured nothing. You seem intent on this being some kind of deception, just like all your other assumptions here.

Some of the users I included because I thought their trust lists were beneficial, some of them I included because of their response to the advice concerning the removal of support from a frivolous flag. It is as simple as that, no "manufacturing of timelines" needed. This is purely a projection on your part designed to impugn my character to serve your own personal vendettas, and the vendettas of people like Vod.

Vultures like you saw I was achieving something positive and did a deep dive into my toilet bowl looking for any peanut fragments you could find in order to tarnish this effort that yielded positive results, because if I have a say in the default trust, I will erode the unilateral control and protection from being penalized for your own abuses that you and your friends currently enjoy. All the same people abusing negative ratings against me are all the same peanut hunters that are the most vocal in opposition to my calls for an objective standard of evidence before leaving negative ratings. This is about serving yourself, not about protecting the forum from me.

Weird, you get to make assumptions and just pretend they are facts, yet when people point out you posted your account for sale and that you can't prove it wasn't sold, of course that is over the line because... well because we can't prove it happened (even though it is a fact you tried to sell it, putting other users at risk). You don't give a fuck about anything but attacking me with your bullshit. Facts be damned.