Quote from: TwitchySeal on May 27, 2020, 12:06:18 AM

Quote from: Vod on May 26, 2020, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on May 26, 2020, 10:48:05 PM

What trust abuse Vod? Be specific.

The negative trust you have left for people you do not like.

Or the refusal of the same type of explanations you demand from others.

Don't forget this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5182530.msg52385837#msg52385837

See:

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.

So Vod, clearly I abuse the trust system according to you... why is it whenever anyone asks you to substantiate your claims you can never do it and always default to just claiming you already have?