Bitcoin Forum

I'm always looking for ways to better myself and becoming a better cogwheel in the machinery that is bitcointalk. Thus I've opened this thread where you are free to voice opinions on my trust list, my trust ratings, my campaign management or anything else I'm involved with.

Have you received negative trust from me and feel it was unjustified? State it here and we'll try and sort it out.

Have I included users on my trustlist that are outright scammers and I've just not paid attention to it? State it here and I'll review it.

Am I enrolling spammers in my Signature Campaigns and it has to stop? Just let me know and  I'll review that too!

Nobody is perfect but we can always strive to be a better version of ourselves tomorrow.

what kind of a 2 year-old uses a vanity address?
skam

Those people who usually trolls may spam this thread. It would be much better if you could make the thread as self moderator. Pardon me if I am wrong. Thanks.

I have actually not used that addy for a loooong time. Guess I should finally retire it, hah.

Yes, agree with it since we are all human here. No one is perfect, but they are the best who try to correction their mistakes (IMO).

One thing I like about you, that is you discussion with community regarding your confusion and mistakes. Once when I know you and working with seems you are transparent enough with your profession/work. However, I have not seen you yet with any corruption and obviously I will notice you if I found in future. Best of luck.

Have you checked one of your participants, played in your campaign from the first to the present.
Yes, maybe a signature manager, takes time, to open this kind of: Topic: Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk III (2019 Q2) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.0)
But occasionally it doesn't matter, visit this multi-account field.

1. jademaxsuy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1788599)



( archive (http://archive.is/cLDAd) )

You can see here:
Multi-account proof, connected.

Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5042900.msg46458020#msg46458020

Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5030091.msg46458094#msg46458094

---

And one more participant in your campaign.

And 2 connected accounts:

2. akram143 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1203941)
3. Burks (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=401512)

Evidence: Reference (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2502431.msg25592651#msg25592651)  (Offering "ICO bumping" services, also known as paid shill bumping. This is a highly shady offer which helps generate fake buzz for various projects.)


( archive (http://archive.is/IlRrw) )


( archive (http://archive.is/wSAjT) )

Now what you ask has been given, the decision is in your hands.

You can't have a serious reputation thread if you can delete negative posts by yourself. Just report all off-topic posts.

I'm not sure about your recent campaign but prior to the latest, I believe you never allowed spammers in your campaign. I appreciate your effort.
Offtopic though-
Yahoo was supposed to one of the best campaign managers but the truth is he is allowing spammers/shitposters in his campaign- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1059850;sa=showPosts
I wouldn't mention it here unless you were asking about this, no campaign manager did this prior to you.

Your idea of insisting that participants applying to your campaigns must have some merits within 1-2 months even when they have the required merits cutoff is, is unnecessary. It encourages merit farming

I hear what you are saying but this is probably one rule that I won't be able to budge on. I always look at each application individually (incl. post history) which means that merit is not the be all, end all. I don't think it would encourage merit farming though?  :-[

It's your willingness to not only discuss issues with people but invite it, that made you an easy addition to my list.

The only thing I would maybe change is using the reference link if available, as well as the BTC risked amount. The clearest example of this would be the latest deal with blockforge. I am a little curious as to why this trade wasn't rated as positive?

I also noticed you had changed a lot of positives to neutrals. Iirc there was  a bit of pressure when the new system was put in place and you were under a lot of scrutiny with your list. Personally I like to see trades rated positive or negative based on the outcome, neutral is acceptable if there were hiccups. With appropriate weight for risked BTC and a reference.

Not to pile on, as I did also see some negatives re-rated. I do like to see someone who is flexible in their ratings. I don't agree with one rating being set in stone with no chance at redemption.

All in all the minor differences in how we manage feedback don't affect me overall. I look through the list of anyone I'm dealing with, and have untrusted feedback set to show as default.

On the contrary, I believe this merit requirement, though not fully guaranteeing a perfect selection of candidates, is a good defense mechanism against abuse of people who want to get in with more than one accounts.

Account farmers I've observed/tracked over the past few months don't have that much merit, and they would find it very difficult to manage and repeatedly supply their alt accounts with merit.

If all the other campaign managers decide to enforce a similar rule, we may see cases of merit abuse, but it will be extremely obvious, easily traceable and who knows...it may end once and for all multi-account applications.  ;)

It also serves to reduce the number of bought accounts joining campaigns. If you are buying an account because you are unable to rank up on your own merits (pun intended), then you will be similarly unable to earn any merit on your bought account, and so you will be excluded from joining campaigns with a "recent merit" requirement.

At the very least the rule requires alt farms or account buyers to buy merit to stay within the time frame requirements, therefore reducing the profitability of spamming, which can only be a good thing. Merit sellers will also run eventually run out of merit, preventing these accounts from joining at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong Hhampuz, but I'm sure I've seen you say previously that you would be willing to overlook the rule anyway if you thought a poster was particularly good. Given that, there is literally no downside to having a recent merit requirement.

At least you are seeing what am saying. Also you have to know that most merited posts do not deserve the merits. It does not mean the posters are great with their posts. It is a friendship exchange sometimes.

You are absolutely correct! I may look at merit first, but in some cases I'll dig into the post count of someone who earned 0 merit and from time to time they may just be posting in the "wrong" sections while still creating quality posts.

Having been a constant participants of your campaigns and having qualified for anyone i apply to join and looking at other users been accepted too I can say you're doing well when it comes to accepting quality non shitposters in all your campaigns. As a result I notice your campaigns don't always have open slots that's great news as it says a lot about the campaign manager accepting only quality rule abiding users.

Your payment are always on time in all your managed campaigns (haven't seen any complains of deserving members not receiving their earned payouts) and from my timezone that's the first thing I see every morning on payments days ;D and having recieved the following benefits from joining your campaigns (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5128076.0) and I haven't seen any accusations of you abusing your power as a CM nor abusing your DT privileges, I can boldly say you're doing a great job Hhampuz. +1

I think Hhampuz is a horrible campaign manager. For months he has been paying me the regular signature payouts while, apparently, DT members should get paid more (source (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5095156.msg50489216#msg50489216)).

*obviously joking*

Hhampuz, my thoughts on you as a poster are that I regard you very highly on the forum. I don’t know you off it but I consider yourself as very trustworthy. You always seem positive & you seem a nice guy. You obviously manage campaigns well which in itself comes with a level of trust. You look after escrowed money & pay your campaign participants on time. You’re DT1 & are active red tagging scammers etc.

The forum would be a worse place without you.

Keep up the good work :)

LFC

Taking forum members opinion is always a pretty way to find the solution. Its not only having solution in a proper way but also giving everyone the chance to discuss and sharing their own thoughts. Controlling a signature campaign isn't an easy task when there's been a couple of matters to look after. I think you have already build your reputation through your work of excellency and its worth respect. Yeah its true that sometimes something could be missing from our research or investigation and that's not impossible because we are not machines. But holding average perfection is not so easy to maintain and you are doing this with your great effort.

Hopefully will try to put your attention if anything looks unusual to me and I think its a responsibility for me after having a thread like that.

+40 trusted feedback speak out about your reputation bro. :)

You are the person who brings campaign management to next level by managing 6 or 7 long running highly paying signature campaigns with on time payments.

Yep, he's been doing that for quite some time now--but I've always thought that he's not completely to blame for this.  These projects that need advertising want to get a lot of signature campaign participants, and the pool a manager has to select from isn't always the greatest.  If I'm not mistaken, Yahoo62278, Lutpin, and others started up the SMAS movement that eventually fizzled out (and I'm not sure why that happened).  I still have mad respect for Yahoo62278, and for Hhampuz as well.

Hhampuz is setting some seriously stringent requirements for applicants last time I looked, and that's fantastic.  This forum needs more of that kind of management, especially since the altcoin bounty section is jam-packed with bounties that any idiot can join, regardless of post quality, merits, red trust, rank, and probably other factors.  They accept the lowest of the low, and the forum as a whole pays for it.

Keep up the good work, Hhampuz.  It doesn't go unnoticed around here, believe me.

I witnessed the humble beginning of Hhampuz and right before he entered the game there are a bunch of good campaign managers already but still he introduced himself with a bang and he deserves what he's right now as a reputable Signature campaign of this forum.

If there's only a ranking of Campaign managers then for me, Hhampuz is rank 1 as of the moment.

Inviting people to judge your work is the best thing that you can offer for those haters  ;).

Thank you for the kind words everyone, it truly means a lot to me! I've been in a bad place recently but I have to tell you that this forum has been a big reason for my recovery.

I've decided not to reply to each post here individually as this was meant to be a thread about my reputation and I was looking for feedback in areas I could better myself.  I just hope some of you don't think that this is a form of boosting my ego because it really isn't. That being said, again, I appreciate everything that has been said up until this point a lot.

One thing I've notice about the participants on your campaigns is that, they keep on jumping out into a new campaign once you've posted a new one they can't just stick to their current campaign. Its given that you've made a new campaign with a higher payment rate but i think its better to regulate them, so other forum members have the chance to work with you.

Anyway, you've done a great job in this forum and that is why you are being trusted by many users. You are managing the campaign well, and you've work hard for this one so you really deserve it. Keep it up!  :)

Of course, he is able to rise to the level he's now within s short time in campaign management because of little things as these - interacting with his participants and asking them to pm him if they have issues.

Most campaign managers here don't do that. Instead, they act like demi gods, lord it over people and talk down on them.

Keep it up, dude. I don't ass lick and I am not saying this because am in your campaign presently. It doesn't change anything for me.

Chances are still there if they leave on the previous campaign. And also this is just a common routine for every bounty hunters, they just simply advertise not pushing their support into a certain project, unless the project is said to be good.

I'm a freakin' example of those hunters, and just like I have been on Rocket which is a good one, until now I've been supporting them and keep on being updated even though I'm on other project advertising.

Also we can't deny that some people here are making these things for a living ( not me :) this is only an extra). As long as participants are not breaking the rules I think there isn't bad on jumping on campaigns one after the other. In fact it will still depend on the Manager whether they will accept them or not.

Hhampuz is just being kind and considerate as long as he sees the participants are doing a fair and good job (Based on my observation).

And as for yahoo62278, he's the same the only thing is,  he want's his participants to be somewhat inpart of the project that he runs with a campaign. (Based on my observation). (Actually, am scared of him for being strict :P I don't want to see my name on the SMAS list - same goes with Hhampuz when I'm seeing his tone a bit pissed.)

I didn't have very much of interacting with you so far, but somewhere this last two weeks we have had a moment of RAFFLE and BTC sending etc.... The way of your super fast responding (explaining detail while its been written in the thread, but still you did) and taking care of your stuff is very A+++ so if your a known guy to treat everybody this way then its very logical your 1 of the most trusted people on this forum, i'm not a sigh campaigner myself or account that switch his HAT for whatever avatar but i'm sure the ones you work with will be handled very properly.....
Looking forward to join stuff of you again and I will always send you first with no hesitation or whatsoever.

Dammit sorry I forgot to leave you a trust feedback

Keep doing your thing, keep this forum healthy keep being yourself.

Edit: always keep yourself together IRL and in here, but the way you act and write on this forum shows you got the right spirit and integrity of being a highly liked person, will be  try to read more of you.

I participated in Hhampuz-managed campaigns since 2018, not too many campaigns due to my low rank and limited chance to apply with my rank, honestly.
I have some points to share with my memory with Hhampuz (from now on I will use manager, instead of Hhampuz):
- Manager is kind-hearted: He always give chances for his participants to have second chances. If a participant get troubles in real life, can not have time to use the forum, and finish works required by campaign rules, he or she can contact manager to announce, and may get acceptance to keep his or her slot for next week. Manager always welcome PMs to ask for help, such as campaign rules, support with postcheck issues, or anything relates to campaigns or even beyond campaigns' stuffs.
- Manager is generous: He actually contributed to Bitcointalk Charity Funds run by cabalism13 for Filipinos.
Bitcointalk Charity Program - Give Hope To Everyone $1 Is A Big Thing For Them (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5124375.0)

---

Generally, I have never had issues with Hhampuz in campaigns he managed, not sure about what happened with Collectibles, but the Trust of Hhampuz mainly come from collectibles, and it makes sense for his contribution, and reputation in Collectible space.

Wow HHampuz, I actually thought this was another thread to allow people you tag to make claims regarding said tags.

I was really surprised it was actually about your own reputation.

I don't know you for long, but you have been factual, straight and fair as far as I can tell, which is better than most humans.

Personal Development is always a good thing, even if it is sometimes difficult. I wish you all the best in this pursuit.

Hhampuz is a class act... a while ago I PMed him in a bad mood, don't recall what it was about but he was nice and courteous with his reply, kinda made me feel bad LOL

No, seriously, great member of the community, staying cool despite attempts to drag him into the dirty gutters of forum drama. Keep it up!

You like snow a little too much. :-[

Hhampuz appears to be making decisions on behalf of those he is working for (eg his advertisers/clients) that benefit him personally, that are detrimental to his clients/customers.

If you are considering hiring Hhampuz, I would suggest that you not.

Untrustworthy

Did you get kicked out of a campaign for being a dick? if so why are you still wearing the sig?

The last I checked, hhampuz doesn't kick people out of his campaigns for being a dick (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5138619.0)

I have no reason to believe anyone wants me to remove my signature. No one has made any effort in any way to get me to remove it

The last I checked, hhampuz doesn't kick people out of his campaigns for being a dick (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5138619.0)
[/quote]

2 types of dicks, those who are loud and proud and have no issues hiding the levels of cuntness they posses, Then there are the closet dicks, those who are small, un-proud and small - they just snipe away whenever they can, well so I have been told by a reliable source.

I am not sure what happened with you and Hhampuz as well as Livecoin campaign, but the key rule is managers have rights to remove participants after announcements if they think those participants are not fitted with campaigns they managed.
There are two kinds of actions:
- Removed at the check and pay day: without payment of last week at all. This one might lead to complaints.
- Removed after check and payday: It means participants got payments for last week and only be removed for next one after getting announcement. I think this one is fine. This rule even states that participants can be removed without payment or notice.

I am awaiting negative trust if you do believe this to be true.

Also you should probably write this in my service thread for my campaign management, would make the most sense.

Ignore him, he's just struggling to remain relevant. It's not like anyone values his biased opinions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Says a troll who's got anything but a clean trust history on this forum. QS, NO ONE cares about your irrelevant and often incorrect OPINIONS. You bring nothing but drama and nonsense to this forum. 

If you are considering hiring Hhampuz, I highly recommend doing so. He's a good buddy of mine because he's a man of integrity with a big heart. He takes his work very seriously and is highly trustworthy.

If you are considering listening to Quickseller, I would suggest that you not.

If you are considering hiring Hhampuz, I would suggest you do it, he is a professional and valuable member of Bitcointalk community!

I am not sure what you are trying to say. I have not received any trust ratings since I joined his campaign.

Hhampuz confirmed via PM that he removed me due to personal pressure (benefit he would receive) and not due to the effectiveness of my advertising. Further, he has made *zero* attempts to get me to try to remove the signature I have been wearing since removing me from the campaign.

He is obtaining personal benefit to the determent to his client, the entity who has hired him to maximize the value of their advertising dollars.

It is ridiculous to suggest posting this in a censored (self moderated) thread, and it is worthless to leave a trust rating when multiple of his friends (who are getting paid by hhampuz money from his clients) will leave ratings covering this up.

I am not sure why someone with a history of plagiarism (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2855895.msg30964947#msg30964947) thinks he can speak to the integrity of someone else. This is someone who effectively stole something when he thought no one would notice.

I see no reason to engage in any kind of debate with you considering you are incapable (refuse) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5065324.msg47685919#msg47685919) of debating anyone who disagrees with you.

I would point out that your post was paid for by hhampuz, out of money from one of his clients. 

I didn't try and hide anything, nor did I intentionally break the rules. I copy/pasted a couple posts during a single day to uphold my promise to my campaign manger during a time of extreme turmoil in my life.  Yes I fckd up.  Every single satoshi of those funds received went to charity as well (hence not benefiting me in any single way). You are a douche of all douches and I simply can't understand why you are still on this forum. Look at your trust, you've done nothing wrong here before? You're pathetic, and NO ONE wants you here. NO ONE trusts you. The same can't be said for myself. Take that as you will.  Go troll 4chan or something.


edit- LOL to the fact you still wear a signature and don't get paid. Why not go and join a campaign that will actually pay you? Oh right, because no one would hire you. Pathetic.

@Quickseller, this will be my last reply to your claims.

Against the better of my judgement and several other users voicing their opinions (you may believe it to be 1-2 but there were many, many more) I hired you in the LiveCoin campaign to give you a chance at earning some BTC since you do post a lot. For 6 weeks straight I paid you, on time and without issues and this is how you repay that favor?

I am under no obligations to hire you or anyone else and I am free to do what I want in terms of removing members from the campaigns I manage. Each and every one of my clients have full confidence in me and my ability to manage a campaign and that is why they let me handle it all the best way I see fit. I removed you due to receiving messages from many members, yes. You can call it pressure if you want but more than anything I just didn't need the extra work needed (justifying you being paid to post). It was a mistake to even give you a chance to begin with, and I see that now considering how you are handling all of it.

Regarding not trying to get you to remove the signature/avatar: You are free to wear any signature/avatar you see fit, they are all publicly posted here at the forum and I can't control you. I messaged you several times to explain to you that you'd be removed and I would assume that it was enough combined with removing you from the spreadsheet. Evidently not so consider this my formal request, please Quickseller, remove your signature and avatar. You are no longer being paid by me or by LiveCoin and this, the wearing of them, sees no benefit for you.

I'm pretty sure most members would back me up on you burning your bridges on trying to earn from a campaign and considering how you are now treating me, someone who gave you an honest chance for 6 weeks straight, I'd say you've made it even more difficult for anyone to give you a chance in the future too.

Now I'd appreciate it if you'd stop posting in this thread as I will no longer reply to you.

I continue to wear the signature to show there is no repetitional concern of my advertising for livecoin.

You are intentionally not hiring the most effective advertisers so that you obtain personal benefits. This is in effect you taking a little bit of the advertising budget off the top for your personal use.

Your post indicate my advertising for livecoin is no detriment to their reputation, and your PM indicated to me that you acknowledge livecoin has received an outsized positive benefit to my advertising.

This is not unlike how you accepted (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3248711.msg34033364#msg34033364) a friend of yours into another one of your campaigns that you knew was plagiarizing post -- you accepted an inferior advertiser who you knew was not going to make good posts into your campaign because he was your friend and you would benefit.

If you can prove that I plagiarized during his campaign, I'll leave this forum.  Good luck as my plagiarizing issue was when I was in Atriz's Moonlight campaign.  Take a look at my posts while in Hhampuz campaigns. Not good posts? I've done plenty for this forum in terms of posting positively.  I don't troll nonsense every other post like yourself. Get your story straight.

What an extraordinary asshole. If any of that was true you'd be signing up for another campaign instead of attacking the one person who gave you the benefit of the doubt. But it doesn't look like anyone wants to hire you and your meltdown here shows why.

That's all I've ever observed from and heard about him.  We've got some really good bitcoin-paying campaign managers, but I've often thought that most altcoin/token bounty managers ought to use him as a model for how they should run their bounties.  And yeah, he definitely seems like a personable guy, which is a rarity on bitcointalk.

Yes it was.  I'm not sure if any project would want someone with QS's very tarnished reputation advertising for them.  I'm actually surprised you gave him a shot but nobody's perfect, right?  And there's a very good reason for all that tarnish, but now he's trying to get it to rub off on you by smearing your reputation and saying that you shouldn't be hired as a campaign manager.  That's low but not unexpected, and the good thing is that he's not going to convince many people.

You really have a hard time getting messages that are loud and clear, don't you?  I've seen examples of this before, too.

Right, this is one of the examples I was thinking of.  There surely is some sort of autism involved here, but that's just me playing armchair psychiatrist. 

I think Hhampuz has learnt his lesson about accepting people with walls of red trust and those known to be involved in wrongdoings.  :-\

This should serve as enough of an impetus to see that those members of this forum who have been trying to get the best of the DT for their own advantage even after being red trust should not be be given even a single opportunity.

Giving someone a second chance always ends up biting back. There is no doubt about about. In either case they will move on to a new account with a completely new name and bitcoin address just because they cant control the urge for free money.

Hhampuz is very approachable, very friendly, extremely trustworthy & an absolute credit to our community here.
I don’t even know why his reputation is being discussed. Anybody who questions his integrity clearly has a motive.

Edit - Hhampuz, you should lock this thread now. You have nothing to prove to anybody. Look at the masses of respected accounts in your corner.

I completely agree with this, I am not sure why Hhampuz accepted quickseller.

It is actually sad, someone gave them second chance and then they choose to shit on that person. How fucked up you have to be to do that?  :-\

---

I will just quote this and agree with it.

Don't try to spread that BS to thickly.  You're still wearing the banners out of spite, and you know it.  You have no altruistic reason to promote some new random exchange, and if the circumstances were different you would stop wearing their banners the minute you were taken off their payroll.  All you're doing is flaunting your power struggle with Hhampuz.  Shame on you for being such a bully.

I actually consider you to be one of the better posters on the forum, and I value your contributions.  The help you've given to lenders by sniffing out would be scammers hasn't gone unnoticed by me.  It did strike me as odd that Hhampuz gave you a slot on one of his campaigns, but it didn't surprise me at all considering your post quality and Hhampuz's generosity.

Hhampuz asked you politely to remove the banners, quit being a bully and do as the man asked.

Are you talking about integrity such as accepting his friend who recently had plagiarized at the time?

Second chance? At what exactly? Speak slowly so I can understand.


I think I already know the answer....not criticizing you and your friends.

You are correct I have no altruistic reason to keep my signature up, as stated the signature remained up because I wanted to point out there are no negative reputation harm to livecoin - the entity Hhampuz is ultimately getting paid by to maximize advertisements for -- of my wearing their signature.

Hhazmpuz's reply confirms that:
He confirmed the reason he did not want me wearing the signature was because I was no longer being paid.

This is my point. Hhampuz is specifically declining to utilize the most effective advertiser, so to personally benefit. He also accepted a friend of his, who at the time had been caught (and had negative trust for at the time) plagiarizing in recent months. I am not calling him out on this because I am involved, I am more than willing to call him (or anyone else) out on this, regardless of who is involved. Neither of these things can align with any claim that Hhampuz is acting in the best interest of his client. The line that he has "full authority" or whatever over his advertising campaigns is BS because that does not give him a license to act to the detriment to his clients (who are ultimately paying participants), especially when he receives a personal benefit.

@Quickseller I admire the determination , everyone keeps telling you that you are wrong, but you don't give a fudge , i love it   ;D.

Not that my opinion matters a lot  ::), but @Hhampuz is probably one of the kindest members I have interacted with on the forum,besides him being so professional in managing campaigns (based on my experience) - I was in one of the campaigns he manages when i was accepted by @Darkstar_ to Chipmixer, and it happened like 2 days before the payout for that week.

Hhampuz was nice enough to ask Darkstart_ on my behalf ( and another member or 2) if we could keep the signature so that we don't miss the prev campaign payout, he went to the extent of PMing me to let me know that  Darkstar_ said it was okay to do so (Thanks @Darkstar_ btw) .

He did not have to do all that , he could have easily deleted my name from the spreadsheet and moved on, but he took all the time and effort to worry about someone else's benefit, this guy is amazing , regardless of what you have to say about him.

I am glad he went out of his way to help you participate in a new signature campaign. Your antidote doesn’t really have anything to do with Hhampuz personality benefiting from the campaigns he runs while harming his clients.

Your hypocrisy is just laughable. So the fact that I messed up once, means that Hhampuz shouldn't have given me a chance? Okay, fair enough. Than he should have never given you a chance. So why do you keep saying this?  You contradict yourself over and over with each and every argument. The fact is I messed up once, during a single day's time. Other than that, I've been a solid "poster". I'm someone who truly cares about Bitcoin and this forum. I've made good on my mistake. I served my time/serving my time, I gave every satoshi during all my campaigns to charity, I've donated to this forum etc. So why don't you shut the fuck up and move on? It is clear you're a one man band crying for some cheese w/that wine of yours.

@Hhampuz, you are extremely liked and to be trusted, I personally experienced this........ Lock the thread and just always remember

https://i.imgur.com/IMdVfQY.gif

It's fine, I have QS on ignore so it doesn't bother me. I feel I need to keep this thread open in case there are any legitimate concerns regarding how I manage my campaigns or otherwise.

I appreciate all the kindness you and others here are displaying though, there's a lot of good people here :).

Sure, no problem.

Someone already quoted this:
Your trust looks like this: Trust: -8177: -13 / +15

So, Hhampuz is good guy who accepted you in campaign and gave you a chance to earn some btc even thought it is against campaign rules. Then you got fired.

Think about it for a second.

I really don't know what is inside your head, "not criticizing you and your friends" means Hhampuz is not my friend because you are criticizing him or, if Hhampuz is my friend and you said you are not criticizing my friends, and you ARE criticizing Hhampuz that means you are lying.
Your statement is - wrong, and makes no sense.

Hhampuz does a great job at managing campaigns and this is being said by one member of the forum that has always been refused to join one of them although I am a much better poster than many average posters of his campaigns. This means only one thing, he is doing a good job.

He is garbage man with low self esteem.

I don't think Hhampuz has ever been a garbage man. There is nothing wrong with garbage men either. They world will turn into a huge pile of litter if nobody empties our bins once a week. Show a little respect or feel free to drive your own garbage to a local landfill instead!

Fucking coward creating an Alt to talk shit. Whoever you are, you're a douchebag of the highest order. Also, garbage men make good money where I'm from. There isn't a damn thing wrong having any type of job. Those who sit around and live off their government are the ones who should be made fun of.

Think about this world without garbage men. Who would be collecting your daily load of household junk and prevent spreading of diseases which are preventable by proper garbage disposal and sanitation? Who would be there to make sure your morning poop is drained to the proper place and not back to your dinner table?

But anyway I dont expect illiterate kids of this forum trying to get weed money by scamming others to understand these things.

This whole thread is just a fucking shit show. Everyone in collectibles section knows H and trusts him. Leave it at that FFS.  Stop the sig camp posts already and negative shit. Whatever anyone may have done in a prior life/job is not relevant here either. ::)

Reading through this thread I see it mention QS was accepted then REMOVED later from a sig campaign run by hhampuz. What did he do during that time to cause his removal?  there seems no details here given at all. Surely this should be fully transparent?

Read more, post less. ;)

I can add and I can remove users from any of my campaigns at any time without having to give an explanation. If you are looking for a communist state I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place!

Being in a signature campaign is not a human right. Campaign participants are expendable.

Hey, since we're in the same cult, it's time to add me to your campaigns again. I need that sweet, sweet bitcoin and I'm dying to spam the forum again. :)

Back in line #214. You'll soon be called upon!

Wrong.  Being non transparent opens you up to corruption and backhanders. Projects are not wanting to be associated with corrupt and devious campaign managers.

Not being transparent makes you seem like you have something to hide?  do you have something to hide?

I would say campaign managers are expendable especially if they taint the projects they are hired to help promote.

I have told campaign managers before they are in a very sensitive and fragile position. Do you not understand this hhampuz?

Why not say QS did X which broke the rules so I removed him?

Feel free to message any of my employers and see how they feel about it. Someone did that a while ago and my employer told me straight up that they just laughed at someone trying to smear my rep.

I am nothing but professional when it comes to my campaigns and all of it is in the public here at the forum. Guess that's the reason why I keep getting hired but hey, don't just take my word for it, message them!

Messaging your employers would only be the first step. Multiple scam threads and reputation threads regarding them and their deliberate selection of a campaign manager who refuses to give transparent and fair opportunities to each member is enough to brand the project a scam. There is no reason NOT  to give a transparent explanation of your actions or it leaves both you and your project open to corruption and scam accusations and rightfully so.

Once you have a google page full of scam accusations which could be bumped and filled regularly with posters who are disgruntled at unfair treatment is a negative the project does not need to have. The campaign manager is far more expendable.

If you are fair then you have no reason not to be transparent about your actions. The only reason to hide the reasons behind your actions would be if you had something to hide? Too many of these unexplained actions is totally grounds for a corruption and scam thread on both you and also the project if they do not capitulate and hire a transparent campaign manager that hires and fires all persons equally on the same grounds or they ARE CORRUPT and scammers.

This I do what the fuck I want with no explanation needed is certainly one that looks very shady to me. What project was this relating to?

I ask you again. What was the reason you dropped QS? did he do something during his time that broke the rules that would have got anyone else dropped too?   

Back handers and also even worse colluding parties receiving the tokens from an initial distribution of a project is even more worrying. I don't think you understand the gravity of what it is you are doing or what it is you are saying. 

Is it asking too much to ask for fair transparent rules that are applied equally to all members?  do you get back handers for choosing certain members? do you get a larger share of the profits if a colluding bunch manipulate the markets for new tokens before dumping?  how can you prove you do not?  this is why you need to be transparent and open about things.

Look around, you are the only one here making these threats. I wish you the best of luck in any and all of your future endeavours, now you are put back on ignore :).

This is not a threat. This is simply the honest course of action. Running and hiding will not save you if you are taking back handers and helping colluders manipulate markets. 

We are concerned by your responses here. If you are doing nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about do you.

All campaign managers need to come under close scrutiny here and their actions should be 100% transparent. This is crucial. Look forward to examining your future campaigns with you.

::)

How many of you are there in imagination land anyways?

I have added Hhampuz to my trust list after the way he handled the latest smear campaign.  :)

well after he was one of the ONLY people to merit you doxxing a member and placing him and the boards funds in grave danger then we did not expect you would not be feltching him back a little bit.

An trust endorsement from someone this wreckless and dangerous is not really an endorsement.

There is no smear campaign against hhampuz either he accepts and denies persons to his campaigns on the basis of the same fair and transparent rules or he is a corrupt and untrustworthy campaign manager that taints all projects he works for. Simple as that.

Sorry if having to be transparent and fair is something he does not want to abide by.

Funny... You are starting to sound like another QS alt at this point. Fucking fool.... ::)

Funny another untrustworthy person coming here to support hhampuz non transparent and dubious looking actions.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

Stop spamming the forum with incoherent, paranoid, borderline schizophrenic bull shit.

https://i.ibb.co/fXQ9ZHm/ED07398-F-CA5-A-4752-A48-B-68-B07199-D221.jpg

Hhampuz is a highly trusted individual here. One Hhampuz is worth a million of you.

Bring me the incoherent paranoid schizo bullshit so we can analyse it. That's a challenge right there. Because presenting observable instances is nothing like that. You are lying are you not dip shit?


Did THEY threaten to make you eat unclean ass for a year if you did not post that?
You do realize now we have confirmation that you are Laudas Feltching Clown that your public brown nosing of laudas known gang associates just makes you look more pathetic and weak LOL

It also does nothing to refute the fact that hhampuz seems to be removing persons without giving transparent fair explanation. He looks corrupt and dirty by failing to set of rules for everyone and making them apply equally to every member. This is called corruption and is untrustworthy.

What part of that is difficult to understand for you Laudas Favorite Cumguzzler?

Paranoid schizophrenia - Constant use of ‘we’ points towards multiple personalities. You’re an absolute fucking weapon of a human being. You need psychiatric help.

It’s observably clear that you invent other people ‘agreeing with your bull shit’.
How come in all these threads where you attack other people’s reputation you’re the only one passionately doing it.

You’re on your own pal, you’re a lonely, sad, pathetic, cuckold.

Now I wish this was a self moderated thread so you could have filtered the off-topic spam off the thread so when interested forum users or projects hoping to hire you for future campaigns comes to read this reputation thread they won't be discourage (from reading the thread) because of all the nonsense off-topic spam I'm seeing from users their red tagged is like that of BTC during bear market.

Scam accusation against Hhampuz https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5147938.0

Would it be a good idea to allow someone who is known to have just stolen to be a bank teller or other employee with access to money? No of course not, anyone who does that should get fired.

So you steal from Peter to pay Paul? Kinda like a Peter pan kinda guy. Good to know.

Can you point to some off topic nonsense  you think should be deleted in your opinion?

RED TAGGED users that have been given red tags for presenting observable instances of wrong doing. Obviously you forgot to mention that. Those are the most trustworthy persons on the entire board.

Future campaigns will find ALL hhampuz related threads and read if they are sensible. Censoring this thread would look more shady. Of course where you are from shady shit may pay off but here in the 1st world it catches up with  you.

The real take away from this thread is hhampuz refuses to be transparent about his actions. That is shady.

If hhampuz said

" I will review peoples posts and will review peoples trust history MYSELF and make a decision that if when called to explain my actions I will be able to present it for public scrutiny" that would be fine.

He seems to be saying. I will add and remove who I like based upon some hidden agenda that I am unwilling to present for public scrutiny.
That is shady and opens him and the project up to a  lot of  criticism. Rightly so.

@The-one-with-lot-of-BS

https://i.imgur.com/QHBkjyT.gif

Take a few hours of Thank you in advance sir!

Watch this challenge.


BRING SOME EXAMPLES OF BULLSHIT AND PRESENT THEM NOW.

Watch nothing happen or just some more stupid memes


I have no care for your opinion until I see some evidence you have the capacity to form something based up on observable instances that makes some kind of sense. You appear to be some noob ass kisser to scammers and their feltchers.

Play human centipede with your pals elsewhere.

Boy, I answer to NO one, I don't deal with scammers, and I don't kiss ass.... or its my GF ass that might be the only one...

Proof to present you of BS = your numerous threads all the same, could easily been said in 1 thread!

Your always telling us the exact same sh*t..... BS without any content or whatsoever, and just always trying to accuse people of things they didn't commit!

This forum has so many eyes trying to catch scammers, with you pointing members out and get no support of anyone, that has to speak for itself doesn't it...

Talking with you feels exactly like talking to r0ach in the WO (only about different stuff, but similar guy always the same BS talk)

Just remember when 1 person believes his GF is honest and loyal, but everyone else from friends to family telling you she's cheating then like ALWAYS the majority is right.....

By the way are you even a BTC'er and are you here with reason, or just to be interested in members here? Cause first thing of importance on this forum = BTC, so maybe start talking about that in some threads and leave these places behind, you ain't got anything to bring to the tables here!

So here we see 0 examples provided. Just a bunch of meaningless crap.

Bring me an example of some BULLSHIT that you can demonstrate is BULLSHIT. How hard can it be. Yes, I have far more bitcoin than you. So stop worrying whether or not I'm a bitcoiner.

Bring me an EXAMPLE of something we have posted that is incorrect and you can demonstrate it is bullshit.  

Here you got a merit from your pal for essentially failing my challenge. Have another try.

Please don't go off-topic, I don't want to start reporting posts..

Well tell them to pull in their false accusations then.

Also if you stop refusing to be transparent then we can leave you to go about your business in peace. There is no need to look shady if you are not shady is there? Why not be transparent if you have nothing to hide.

Any person you refuse should be able to receive a transparent answer that stands up to scrutiny. You can not just hide behind your friends red trust and their gaming of the merit system and defer responsibility to them.

YOU are paid to find the best posters that are NOT scammers. Not just use gamed metrics to ensure your pals get the best spots.

First come first served, unless you can demonstrate they do not meet the threshold of being a good enough poster or they are a scammer. Anything else is discrimination and open to gaming and corruption. It is not difficult to see that asking for transparent fair rules for everyone so that each person is treated equally is the ONLY acceptable way to go.

Excuse me, will no further respond to him....

Btw keep doing your job sir.

You don't even know what you are talking about so why should I give you an answer?

You can ask several of my "pals" that I have removed from campaigns due to several reasons, guess what they are still my "pals". Why are you on a crusade regarding one member? I gave QS an honest chance to earn some BTC for posting for 6 weeks straight and then decided that it no longer looked good for him to be in my campaign while spewing out his bullshit that does no good for the community. I never owe it to anyone to explain why I've removed someone from MY campaigns.

I am not focusing on QS. This is something that MUST be established for all campaign managers concerning the acceptance/denial of all applicants. Once this is fixed the red trust abuse and merit cycling is irrelevant to large number of people here so free speech will have a greater chance.
These concepts seems fairly simple. We have no idea why people are not able to see this for themselves.

It is not a matter of "YOU OWING" an explanation to a specific person. There must be transparent fair rules that are applied equally to all persons. What is hard to see about this. Anything else leaves you open to legitimate criticism regarding corruption and other shady practices.

It is not that hard. You need a threshold of posting quality and NOT to be a scammer. Those meet those criteria are accepted on first come first served basis.

If you can when called on it present a case and say look this persons posts are poor quality or look he has scammed that is different. That means you are doing your job fairly and people can see it is a first come first served basis or that all persons are given equally stringent criteria to be selected.

NO PROJECT wants to be accused of hiring someone to game the distribution of new tokens among colluders or be abusing their position or taking back handers from certain people to assure they get on to the campaigns. I mean there are many accusations that could be leveled at a project that hires a community manager that is not able to present a case that stands up to sensible reasonable scrutiny for their selection process.

There is no reason NOT to be transparent other than if you are shady.  Then if you dropped QS and said he was saying things that reflected poorly upon the sponsor this could be examined and verified (if it were true). Of course though you would need to demonstrate what he was saying was NOT the truth. Hiding the truth is very untrustworthy as is punishing someone for speaking the truth.

We are not specifically targeting you. Although your meriting of OG dox seems again to align you with a shady bunch many of whom are wearing sigs from your campaigns. This looks bad for YOU and your projects.

We believe that yahoo91328749 is even worse but we have not look at him yet. ALL campaign managers must be transparent over their decisions or ALL projects that use them are going to be wide open to legitimate criticism. It is just a matter of applying the correct pressure to the correct spots to force projects to be more careful in their manager selection. It is better if all of that could be avoided and you guys just get transparent of your own volition.

All those fighting against transparent fair rules that applied equally to all members must be removed in time. That is the only acceptable way forward.  All members should have a fair chance to say what they want without fear of their incomes being targeted and trashed.

If theymos removes all sigs and allows projects to ONLY advertise directly with the board that could be far more sensible if campaign managers do not makes sure they are being fair.

Why should you decide how I manage my campaigns? I will never do first come first served basis. That's just ludicrous.

Its not QS , its CH behind that !!!!

Yes, it's obviously CH.  Just look through the post history to see her swooning over CH every time some one makes the connection between the two accounts.

@cryptohunter, congratulations you're the first person ever to make it a whole week on my ignore list without the slightest temptation to peak.  Not even a little.  Life here on the forum is way less polluted as a result.

https://i.imgflip.com/320u34.jpg (https://imgflip.com/i/320u34)

Well of course it is if you want to have some back room deals and back handers to collude and except only your pals. There needs to be a transparent system of selection.

Why is first come first served ludicrous if each member meets the posting quality threshold and not a scammer? Anything else seems like it would require far more work than you are willing to put in. On top of that you could argue only the MOST brilliant people could be campaign managers. I mean how are you to assess post quality above your level of understanding?

Therefore you need to set a threshold that you can cope with and ensure people meet that and are not scammers. After that WHY are you fiddling around picking and choosing in a non transparent way?

If you were not hiding anything and were reasonable you would be explaining YOUR CURRENT selection process because from here it looks like you cream off the best spots for your "pals" and DT members. Most of them are garbage posters (with bags of merit) who will not even offer their best original thought inspiring posts for analysis because they know they are not capable of making and original thought inspiring posts.

@lafu  are you  part of this cryptopia exit scam? don't think hhampuz would want you on this thread.

Jesus christ you sound like a whiney little cunt stuck in overdrive, go smoke a joint or get a fucking blowjob or something to get the poison out of your system you vile hate filled sack of shite!

Swear swear swear, ..I'm a moron who can not tackle the issues presented so don't even pretend to offer a rebuttal.  I'm cryingdumbfish a sig spamming loser who likes the corrupt sig spamming selection process currently.

Shut up you low functioning dreg. Please do not reply to me unless you tackle the central points I am kind enough to publish here. Go recite poetry with the other low functioning imbeciles like tman.

Now as I have said. A fair and transparent selection process that treats each member equally is required. Sorry if that seems too hate filled and poisonous for you. Likely because you know dumb ass idiots like you will not have a chance of creaming off top sig spots ...

If hhampuz is unwilling to be transparent and give all members a fair and equal chance then he must be pushed out and we will bring in campaign managers here that are going to be fair and transparent.

These concepts are likely too difficult for you, just keep spamming your usual worthless trash dummy.

I think you are in the wrong thread if this is something you truly are advocating.

I've hired members in all ranks, from all sections, from all regions and I've been as fair as fair can be. If you are blinded by some mission to just hate on everything - and everyone, that's on you and not on me.


Hah, that's cute.

Don't try wiggling out with some blind filled hate bullshit excuse. Does it sound like I am hating on you. I am simply telling you without transparency you will always leave the projects and yourself open to legitimate criticism.

TRANSPARENCY. Anyone can say I did this I did that. How can people validate this without 100% transparency.

You have not explained why what I proposed was ludicrous. You just called it ludicrous then seem to have not said why? why is that NOT the fairest way that you are capable of doing it? 

You don't seem to grasp the concept of what "transparent" or "fair" means. Go read up and learn something rather than being a keyboard warrior here and then we can talk.  

/Discussion

Been reading up. I am ready. Let's talk.

Transparent means you will have a clear set of rules and that people will get given explanation as to acceptance or denial. This explanation will be clear and observably fair and consistent with all members. 

Can you tell me YOUR definition if those are incorrect?

Just for you to Answer it straight !

No i am not a part of an exit scam , just a customer that lost there some few bucks too !

Maybe you should go outside and buy you some Milkshake and relaxe on the fresh air , rumors say that will be activate and health the brain !

A waste of Time to discuss with you . Cheers

Hhampuz, it is a waste of time to argue with some who won't be transparent but demands it from others.

I would suggest locking this thread and pointing it to a new self moderated one.  :)

Hhampuz is far from transparent. He shows you a nice face then his handlers yank his chain and suddenly he has nothing to say to you and you are blocked with no explanation.

Have you ever worked with people at a real job? They are no different. A job is job - The boss says jump, you fucking jump. This thread is such a disaster. ::)

Thanks for the public confirmation Hhampuz is a paid tool who doesn't make his own choices. BTW none of that explains why exactly he can't have any communication at all, but ok. Sounds to me like he is a weak minded person doing what he knows is not right and would rather not be reminded of it. I thought the trust system was a joke with no consequences on people's real lives? Which is it? Speaking of duplicity, you don't really have much room to talk Mr. "oh I just copied some one else's list" lol. So full of shit.

Oh, so what, you been sitting on your arse on that keyboard all salty so long all you can even think about is a stupid fucking forum trust setup? FML, did you go to private schools and yale too? :P

Anyhow, Fuck you, I'm not arguing with a known grade-a asshole.

BTW, my list is my list. It may have started with some help, but either way, fuck off asshole.

shut up asskisser vod, we know you believe in transparency of OTHER PEOPLES ADDRESSES  that is certainly UNTRUSTWORTHY

However you did provide an EXCELLENT explanation of why honest and trustworthy members may decide it wise to post under alt accounts.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5137144.msg50915510#msg50915510

So rather than just being a total ass licking dreg like you and NOT DO THE RIGHT THING and facilitate scammers like you are doing by not daring to speak up to preserve your own account. Some MAY decide to create proxy accounts to shield their accounts from the TRUST ABUSE you facilitate and still DO THE RIGHT THING AND SPEAK UP.

This relates strongly to hhampuz because as we can see he supported your doxing of a forum treasurer (UNTRUSTWORTHY) and is now refusing to be transparent over his own actions which actually could relate directly to corruption, collusion on initial distributions of tokens and outright scamming.

It is not important WHO delivers observable instances. Only that you can validate them yourselves without knowing who supplied those instances. It is important to know WHY you are accepted or denied earning on the board and how that compares to how OTHERS are accepted and denied.

These are semi complex concepts vod so get someone to explain them to you if you are still having trouble seeing the clear difference.


Hhampuz needs to be transparent so we can see if he is being fair or if he is corrupt and accepting kick backs or is involved in the gaming and  market making of new projects.  If he will not be transparent why do we need him? we can just use campaign managers that will be transparent and demonstrate they are being fair and not leading to narrow initial distributions that can be gamed .

Try to engage and debate the real issues not try to avoid them and make personal attacks. Makes you look weak and unable to make any rebuttal to the central points. That is pretty much like admitting you agree with us or refuse to but can not present a case as to why :)

What the fuck are you rambling about now? Let me break it down. You and your buddy Hhampuz are both duplicitous cowards who don't even have the nuts to tell people the truth to their faces as they stab them in the back. No one told you to change your trust list, just pointing out how completely full of shit both of you are. That is all.

I appreciate all the kind words guys! You always help me in seeing things from new perspectives while all the same bettering myself both as a user here at bitcointalk but also as a human.

Sure sounds good when you stick your fingers in your ears and go "LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" doesn't it? That's who we need in control of the trust system here, people not even mature enough to listen to criticism of themselves.

It's annoying to see these trolls spamming here, but I think that self moderated topic doesn't make sense at all.
There is one goid phrase about them - "The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

QS you are a straight up PUSSY. You are a worthless member of this forum. You may have some good qualities at times, but overall you're a spamming hypocrite. You also act like you’ve never made any mistakes here. I fd up, yet I'm still here and mostly well trusted. Same can't be said about you can it? You're about the only member here who didn't want to see me get a second chance. The only reason you fought against my return is because of who my buddies are here...period. Again, look at my trust and then look at yours. You need a life brother (and psychiatric help).

I'm glad to see you no longer distrust Hhampuz, even after this heated exchange.  I wondered what had caused your sudden change of heart, then I saw he stopped distrusting you just 24 hours earlier.  It doesn't take much, does it? :P


So owlcatz makes a comment, and you go and claim it's a public confirmation of whatever you want?  Then you go on to use that imaginary confirmation in the basis of other attacks.

Shine a light on your claims I am dishonest and it all comes down to you making shit up, am I right?  Or maybe you blindly trust OG when he misquotes? 

I only excluded Hhampuz because he went from including me to excluding me, as well as blocking my messages within a day, all with no explanation after I had literally just offered him assistance in a friendly message (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5145975.msg51187013#msg51187013) which he replied to in kind. For whatever reason he removed me from exclusion so, yeah I removed him from exclusion myself. It's called not being a total psychotic vindictive cunt, you should try it some time. Funny, you seem to be more concerned (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=15728) with the situation of me posting his PM to defend myself than he is. Getting thirsty for more abuse of the trust system to settle your personal vendettas already after only a week are you? Is your taking a break and hoping everyone would forget your behavior AGAIN (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5144134.0) not working out as you had hoped?


I claimed it is public confirmation of exactly what he said, that he is taking orders and not making independent decisions. As far as OG, I don't have to blindly trust him, I know from personal experience (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=915823.0) what an mentally ill obsessive compulsive psychotic stalker you are, and how it is impossible for you to control yourself in the face of criticism. Your ego is so weak the simple fact that some one openly criticizes you sends you into an uncontrollable rage due to the fact some one dares treat you like the mentally ill turd you are, and not the God you imagine yourself to be. Also BTW Vod, if you are going to take a page from Saul Alinsky and accuse your opponents of all the crimes you yourself are guilty of, at least change it up every once and a while so it isn't so transparent.

Actually, you made up a imaginary confirmation.  You always do this.   Everyone can see.  :)

That's definitely true, as I've learned from experience (sometimes the hard way).  But as far as this thread goes, we don't really know if Hhampuz's boss told him to jump or not.  And perhaps none of us are supposed to know.  It's a weird situation with a company that got shut down on very short notice, and there are a number of possibilities as to what happened to the leftover funds and why Hhampuz isn't disclosing the fate of those funds. 

I'm curious, but that's as far as it goes on my end.  I certainly would not have started a thread about this, and I think it's just an attack on a DT member by a former DT member who's been disgraced and may have motives for starting the thread other than curiosity.

Is this your first time trying it?  Just wondering.

I happen to think the figurative nice face is genuine, and he's also not a confrontational person from what I've observed.  It's not surprising he wouldn't provide an explanation for blocking someone's PMs.

Ah, so Hhampuz was an ass to you, but DT inclusion is more important?

And now look!
5/30/2019 11:51:27 PM   yogg no longer distrusts TECSHARE
and then
5/31/2019 9:03:57 AM   TECSHARE no longer distrusts yogg
Doesn't take much to satisfy you, does it?

You're working hard because it's election time, but in another week you'll be back to taking things out of context.   :)

https://i.imgur.com/m6QFAzu.jpg

Right I forgot I am the only one not allowed to make conclusions or have opinions. That is reserved for the Politburo members.


I have known both Hhampuz and Yogg for a long time, I would rather have a constructive relationship with them even if we don't always agree. You know why? They aren't total psychopathic messes like you. Also I am like -5 on DT right now, in order for me to be doing this for "election time" would mean I would magically have to get 5 other people to either drop their exclusions or add me on short notice. Only a moron like you would think such a narrative would make any sense, but any branch you can grab on the way down, you will go for it.


You know I am actually trying real hard to like you Pharmy, but you seem intent on maintaining this antagonism, for what reason I am not sure. I removed you from my exclusions before because I was impressed with the improvement in your behavior, and I actually removed you again from my exclusions a few days ago. Did I make an error in judgement there?

You people just LOOOVE story time and creating this little narrative around me because I get under your skin. It is too bad that scratching that OCD itch has become more important to you than simply living your life. The fact is I am just a little too real for you people and that scares the shit out of you, no matter how vociferously you deny it.

Hhampuz may very well be a nice guy, but if you are also spineless it is indistinguishable from duplicity to me in this circumstance.

Hhampuz has left me the following rating that he knows to be untrue:
The rating uses this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3095008.0) thread as a reference, and information within the thread directly contradicts the statement in the rating left by Hhampuz.

The above rating was left as retaliation for me calling out (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5147938.0) Hhampuz for stealing money from BestMixer when they were shut down by the Dutch government.  

As a result of the above, you should avoid doing business with Hhampuz, because if he scams you and you complain, he will take action to harm your reputation.

Like there's much of a reputation to harm there?  ::)

You fail to respond to anything of substance I said.

Oh I'm sorry QS but you are so far off my radar that I'd need the fucking hubble telescope to try and pick up what it is you are trying to say. Between all the jibberish and repressed anger it's difficult.. Even for someone that makes a living off of reading posts  :-[

Thanks for confirming your income is made up of your work here ;)

I believe you dropped this on your way out!

https://i.imgur.com/6DoqRPG.png

Oh no, Hhampuz is harming Quicksy, the victim should start a red flag.

While there's already too much hot and humid environment going on in this forum, the duel between you two makes me feel like I'm watching a fight between a snake and a mongoose (Uhmm, sorry but I really can't decide nor comment on which one's a snake and who is mongoose here  :P) /jk

How do you make these hyper-marvelous images or were they found online?

@Everyone,
It looks like personal attacks have taken an all new form which shows how abusive anyone can become while trying to ruin someone's reputation. I've checked Hhampuz's history and I believe he won't put his reputation on stake by cheating his own clients as he delivers best quality results to all of his clients (I've watched his campaigns closely based on which I'm saying this).

Hhampuz is known to be friends with a certain group of people who harass and try to extort people who are known to have a lot of money.


A couple of years ago, he asked me if I was BiPolarBob, who was known to have a lot of money and often gave away a lot of money. The above message was entirely unsolicited.

You can draw your own conclusions about the above.

I can't continue supplying you with this but fine... last time though!

https://i.imgur.com/00SYtZMl.png

Hahahahahaha. Are you really getting this desperate?

My conclusion is that you're getting more and more desperate by the day. Dust off one of your no-longer-red alts and join a sig campaign. Perhaps spamming will help you take your mind off all those evil people having the audacity to not like you.

Edit: damn you anon for stealing my word while I was typing a suitably snarky response.

You should use that cream for yourself instead of using flags to sooth what ails you.

What? QS is bankrupt now?  :o
They used to lend people here at Bitcointalk out of their >100 BTC savings.
@QS, If that's the case, you should really take Hhampuz's ointment as it's something a free ailment offered by him to you. /jk


So? A red flag as well as a tag for them would be suitable for "plagiarising your content"?  :P

Let's state it clearly: this will of yours to be "honest", and not to get involved in scams, is relative. Of course, you've managed to get an advanced ranking here and you're making good business, but this could be the case in any domain where dishonest people can reach any level and have the trust of others, yet they'll have at least one dark side that they can't deal with and is a red line.

Example: child molesters. Take the example of Jimmy Savile. He was the best of the best in this society. Yet he's now probably in hell (but who knows). In your example, it's dirty money, especially what comes to your pocket from FortuneJack.

You're cursed and go to hell with my money.