Quote from: TECSHARE on May 26, 2020, 07:43:47 PM

Quote from: nutildah on May 26, 2020, 09:51:54 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 25, 2020, 05:08:37 PM

You completely sidestepped addressing Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster. Never mind that these things have nothing to do with the facts of the matter, what is important is that I demand you address them as if they are real! If you don't address them as facts then you are just side stepping them!

You again completely ignored my post where I pointed out exactly how you were lying while using verifiable evidence to do so.

Quote from: nutildah on May 21, 2020, 11:45:58 AM

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

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.

This is not what happened. With the exception of 1 member, (Blacknavy), he added all of them first, before he knew how they would respond to his "mediation" (or well before the entire thing took place). The real order of events is this:

- TS gets included by Turkish members and ends up back on DT1 (with a positive score)
- TS "mediates" dispute between Timelord on Turkish community
- TS's reciprocal trust inclusion history is exposed
- TS falls back off DT1 (with negative net inclusions)
...7 months later...
- TS ends up "back on" the default trust list with +2 inclusions

You were back on DT1 before the dispute with Timelord.

Just because my reply is not consistent with your delusions doesn't make me a liar. It just means your assumptions about my intent are not only meaningless but incorrect. I responded to your accusation more times than I can count now, but some how you expect me to be able to prove my intent, but since I can't I am a liar according to you. You have ZERO evidence of anything except your determination to craft these series of events into some kind of malfeasance to serve your own personal petty vendetta.

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.

Quote from: amishmanish on May 26, 2020, 11:56:02 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 25, 2020, 05:08:37 PM

Good thing I have you here to tell me what I am saying, I certainly couldn't do that without you selectively interpreting my words into what you wish them to be. I explained myself several times, Nutilduhh is intent on pretending that they caught me in some kind of ulterior motives when it is based on absolutely nothing but their own assumptions and bias against me. I don't need to explain myself because I have done it 100 times already and Nutilduhh doesn't want to hear anything except the narrative that serves their personal vendetta.

I don't care what you guys have against each other. I just looked at this and just respectfully trying to understand your viewpoint. You call it "selective interpretation" because maybe you don't agree with it. Which part? I have only asked you to reconsider adding people for the sake of bringing balance or diversity. You keep saying that the "Clown Car" is opposing you because they don't want you on DT-1. Maybe, just maybe, that is because people expect more frugal judgement from someone on DT-1. I have just presented my opinion on it above. In the same vein, I only asked you that you should reconsider whom you empower. Gave you examples above too.

You have said earlier: (emphasis mine)

Quote from: TECSHARE on September 09, 2019, 07:45:32 PM

You want to REALLY know why I added those Turkish users? Because they were just barely off the DT and I wanted to see it more diverse. Additionally because anyone the resident clowns exclude I immediately find interest in. The Turkish community was obviously being targeted. I don't believe it was for racist reasons though, I just think the clowns feel like they can't keep their iron grip of nepotism if more groups are included. All this circus is, is punishment for working to bust up their little clown cartel, and it is painfully transparent.

That is why i said:

Quote from: amishmanish on May 21, 2020, 10:29:50 AM

If we only talk about the trust with the Turkish users, he says that he may have added them for his own reasons. At one point, i think he has said that he wants the forum to have more diversity in DT1. That diversity also seems to be primarily targeted on having sufficient opposition to the "clown car" or whatever. LOL.

I just wanted to present a case before you (thinking you are an old, influential member). In any case, its your own judgement. You don't have to be rude. You don't know me enough. Our only previous interaction has been business that didn't go through. I hope to buy a mystery box someday as they have rave reviews generally.

PS: Calling someone with an Amish" in name, a rube. That is rude even by DT standards, LOL..

The fact that you don't care that nutilduuh is pushing a personal vendetta here is relevant regardless of you caring about it or not. Disinterested third parties love making lazy casual observations not knowing the entirety of the story, but feeling perfectly confident giving their opinions about the situation anyway. The selective interpretation is where you tell me what I meant and cherry picking my replies to fit in with your half assed assessment. I don't know you and I don't care to. You are a muppet that just repeats what you see people like nutilduuuh say and treat it as fact. I have no interest in knowing people that don't have any ability for independent thought and pretend to know things when they are just casual 3rd party observers skimming the surface as lazily as possible. Maybe, just maybe you don't have any fucking clue what you are talking about and should keep your opinions to yourself.

What's funny is that nowhere in your long-winded, insult-ridden response did you demonstrate how my timeline was incorrect.

Here's the order of events you presented:

1.

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

I mediated a dispute between Timelord and some members of the Turkish community

2.

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

they added me

3.

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

as a result I ended up back on the default trust list.

Here's what actually happened:

1. You ]added Turkish members to your trust list and they reciprocated (with the exception of Blacknavy who added you first).

2. You ended up back on DT1.

3. You mediated the dispute between Timelord and some members of the Turkish community.

So, you lied. Stop lying and I'll stop correcting you.