Bitcoin Forum

Some people in this forum are abusing their power. They do whatever they want with me. It can never be accepted. After repeatedly telling them, they continue to attack me personally.

@marlboroza (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=787736) @ morvillz7z (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1825672) gave me negative feedback and @Quickseller (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=358020) create a flag in my account. They have no strong evidence against me. They are only giving me negative feedback based on their own estimates. Isn't it an abuse of power?

The Trouble Begins here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215242.msg53533405#msg53533405

Please check this thread and judge it correctly. The context here was about giving extra merit. But they failed to give me the right answer and started attacking me personally and everyone started catching my mistake and posting publicly.

I am a man and a man can make mistakes. But they talk like they've never done anything wrong in their whole life. I've told them many times that I apologize if I make a mistake. But they continue to attack me. If you check the thread then you will understand. Without any solid proof, they continue to accuse me.

I'm asking for a fair trial.

Local rules:
@marlboroza
@ morvillz7z
@Quickseller
are not allowed to post here.

If you're looking for a fair trial, you'd need to change your local rules .

can I have my merits back please sir!

you should be banned. merit beggaring is violation of forum rules

Truly if there is a system for merit back then I would definitely refund your merit. Because of this merit, I was forced to write this post today.
You say, if someone gives me merit, is there anything wrong with me? have I something to do here?

I was only joshing, I am not getting involved in this one, I seriously thought you were a decent poster who deserved recognition. I only saw your profile as you were on the list of newbies in a thread here.

If I'm understanding this situation correctly, you plagiarized some content through a text spinner...?  If that's accurate, you'll probably get permabanned and all of this negative trust and flagging will be moot.  

And yes, we've all made mistakes before, some more serious than others, but that doesn't mean any of us can't call BS when we see it.  By that logic, anyone is free to do anything with no consequences whatsoever.  The world just doesn't function that way.

That's not what all this is about, it it?  Because TMAN explained why he gave you 50 merits for that post, and the explanation seemed reasonable to me, and he's not abusing the merit system by doing what he did.  Lazy, maybe.  But there was no abuse IMO. 

Some of my posts coincide with an article by coincidence. I noticed it myself later. But it's not intentional. I didn't really do any plagiarism. 


Yes, I agree there was no merit abuse here. I mentioned it in that thread too. @TMAN made no mistake here.
But some people could not accept it. @TMAN is a respected person. So they didn't dare say something to @TMAN
So they started attacking me. Everyone attacks the weak people like me. Hailing me without any valid evidence.

 ::)

because I did fork all wrong, sure I was a little lazy just dropping 50 on that post, but if I hadn't this wouldn't of come out!

you shouldn't copy pasta and there is always a punishment for copy pasta pajeets! 50 less merits in circulation but one less copy pasta when you get banned!

Simplified for support: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1208;support. Tagged as well. Add me to the list of abuse please.  Much appreciated.

I think the evidence is pretty clear that you are involved in serious merit abuse and merit farming, I strongly suspect among other newbie accounts. The evidence can speak for itself. This goes way beyond giving a few merit you received via the merit airdrop to yourself(/your “friend”). You were likely using an alt to ask a question in very poor English, and immediately use a text spinner to give an answer to the question to get merit.

NO that is not how it works. You want punishment for WRONG DOING. Then ALL wrong doing must be evaluated and the correct and consistent punishment must be given.

Else that means you are pushing for a  2 tier system that will always be WRONG.

A rapist, murdering, armed robber, peado , does not get to claim that guy stealing 1 cent candies MUST BE PUNISHED without themselves being punished in a fair and sensible way. Even worse that rapist mudering armed robber peado does not get to give the punishment out as judge and jury whilst loving the fact they are paid to push this double standards crap. That is extreme example but just so we are clear one is accepted generally as worse than the other.

I think though in this case if there are multiple counts of different "guides" being presented that are clear copy and paste with zero references WITH financial intent then yes a sig ban and merits stripped off.  BUT after we punish the proven scammers here and they get it first.    


They scammers, can point OUT wrong doing, but should not be screaming for what they think is the correct punishment whilst not being willing to discuss their own punishment.

Would be good to see the ORIGINAL guides and his guides so we can see how it really is.

Lauda giving out red to anyone is a joke. Same for his cronies/supporters.

These people should really have NO POWER to abuse. There needs to be a drill down on this "plagiarism" and sensible punishment depending on the intentions and consistency over time.  Let's sort it out right after those with scamming post histories start commenting on their own suitable punishments.


Were not all these HE MUST BE BANNED AND RED TAGGED pals with chibitchity or whatever and begging for him to be reinstated to this forum AFTER he admitted he did it for financial gain??? have they slapped him with red and flags yet?? DOUBLE STANDARDS>
YES OR NO??

The intent should be key here but both can get a sig ban, won't hurt to remind them. Sigs are the problem here anyway.

This account is not allowed to post here, it clearly says in rules:


However, nothing except account names is stated in local rules. Actually, it is very stupid local rule, even if you say "account "X" is not allowed do post here someone might easily create new account and post anyway. It could apply to alt accounts but OP has to write it in local rules.

Nah, admin created merit system because of YOU and then you tricked system with some plagiarist spin shit and there are some accounts and some other stuff.

What 'power' are you talking about?
Is this some super-natural power, and now you think you also have 'power' to stop them posting here  ;D

League of Extraordinary Bitcoinalk Members

Just because it says no moronbozo does not mean you can swap to your alt zorrobeck?? wtf -  I know we dont have the video evidence you requested but nobody else seems to require that to make concrete judgements.

anyway rather than chastising others please make an on topic point.

There is abuse or not? what are your thoughts and detailed explanations. We say there is abuse in the form of double standards, what do you say??
Also we restate they scammers should not have these powers in the first place.

I am responding to a complaint about me and as a result any local rule prohibiting my posting won’t be enforced. The same tends to be true regarding ban evasion rules when someone is banned and responding to a scam accusation (or even to make one).

Sadly, I suspect that as a result of this, merit will flow much less freely to newer users.

Right..

Please quote where it says "no moronbozo" and that account zorrobeck is not allowed to post here. Stop shitposting.



Please read post before spamming nonsense.

To be so insecure where you won't create a platform for others to defend themselves (i.e. your local rule) but where you accuse others of misconduct and overexerting their 'power'...

---

By the way, the local rule will most likely not be enforced. If you really want to block their replies, you could create a self-moderated thread... but that probably won't stop anything. :)

Here's my objective stance:

There is no fucking way that you can have the same structure as an article within 8 minutes of the thread being posted without having prepared it beforehand.

This post:

---

It's also incredibly nonsensical. Almost looks ML-generated with the repetition of the words. ::)

For example, what in the hell does this sentence mean? "It has the store value and the exchange value."

I am not disputing your point around the 8 mins. Although it is conceivable possible. The points being made are very basic and actually correct in terms of the coins having their own blockchain and tokens primarily using eth. The other parts regarding spending/trading not so sure.

I think that sentence means (having read the passages above) that it can be spent in a store or traded at an exchange ... possibly??

@marlboroza and @Quickseller You guys are really illiterate and stupid. I made it clear in my post that you guys do not have permission to post here. I am sure you guys are really illiterate. Go to school to get educated. Noob.

And now the true colors show. Insults, retaliatory trust ratings, fake flags, the works. This is straight out of cryptohunter's/TOAA's book, and look how it turned out for him. You really aren't helping yourself here.

I don't get the purpose of the flag. Is it for sockpuppeting? Or for plagiarism? Doesn't sound like a proper use of the flag system.

Thanks for pointing, I was bit dump while supporting it but I too think that it is not an proper use of flag system. Deleted my opinion on the flag.

Obvious merit farming. Using deception to obtain merit under fraudulent pretenses.

Deceptive behaviour is flag-worthy, see theymoses quote on account sales[1].

Thankfully you are wrong about this.

---

[1] Quickie and Laudie agreeing may be the beginning of the end of this place.

How is that "a high risk of losing money"? Merit is not money.

OP didn't asked TMAN to give merits to him or put on some highly intelligent trap to gain those merits hence not deceptive.


Hopefully, I am not.

Any kind of highly deceptive behaviour is flag-worthy, there is no going around this. Precedent has been set. Why are you guys  trying to defend people who are trying to defraud others (regardless in what way, even if it something as simple as merits)?

Not defending him, just not supporting wrong use of something which is setup to be used abided by some rules for the betterment. I can't act like you making my own rules here, it would look bad on me.

Are you stupid?

Here, I'm even going to do your job for you:

Look where active deception i.e. what OP did is. The points go from the strictest to the most lenient one. In case you all missed it, the quote also directly implies that flag type-1 for lying is appropriate use of the system even in passive deception let alone active deception. Some people may disagree with it and thus not support it, but it is appropriate use nevertheless.

---

If you don't see it, or refuse to see it I shalt post it at maximum font size on every other post.

Do you have a link to that quote, please?

Just updated the post, see above. My apologies. It's from a PM response from an inquiry with permission to post. Since he didn't dispute it since October, you can safely assume it being the original despite a lack of formal confirmation.

It's not about defending a merit farmer. The wording about "high risk of losing money" is important in this context. I don't see the high risk of losing money here.

I think your focus on "losing money" and the exact "high" (risk) wording has made you miss out on how this system is supposed to be used. Is there a high risk of losing money with every purchased account? Even theymos argued against it ("Individual cases can be debated on their merits, though"), and said it was still appropriate use of the system.

When you support this flag you're saying that there is a high risk of losing money dealing with this particular user (not in some hypothetical account sale scenario) and that the referenced thread contains evidence.

I will oppose the flag for now because I "believe that it is at least partially false".

I am very saddened by your misunderstanding of what is appropriate use of this system even in light of theymoses quotes.  :-\

I'm pretty sure I'm using it appropriately to oppose a flag that is not meeting the minimum requirements. Unless you can ELI5 the high risk of losing money in this particular situation.

No, that's not what I meant. You are using it appropriately to oppose it, but we are also using it appropriately to create and support it. That's the crux of theymoses quote, but it doesn't seem that it go through to you. :'(

Sure. We can flag each other for liking lemons or melons. Look at korner / Bitcoin SV flagging everyone without any consequences. Everything appropriate I guess.

BINGO!

---

So...  On a forum that does not ban scammers for scamming,^* a case that involves ban-worthy behaviour of an extremely dishonest nature does not indicate a “high risk of losing money” in trading?

With all due respect, I think that’s extraordinarily naïve at best.

The ban-hammer will almost surely fall on this one.  The-Devil says, “Some of my posts coincide with an article by coincidence.” (!)  Would you risk any money trading with this person?


Indeed, would any sane person above the age of four risk money with this person?

/thread

---

(* I understand the reasoning.  The point stands, with delightfully twisted irony.)

It is the deception that in my eyes triggered the flag. The merit he received will allow him to potentially appear more competent than otherwise and will allow him to potentially earn money from having that merit (this is not assuming he sells it — he could earn money without selling the merit).

Even more of a reason to not use the trust system for this. Report to moderators. There is no need for the trust system to encroach on the enforcement of forum rules.

This flag should not be supported by "any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user".

I don’t wish to get involved in your drama, but I noticed you opened a frivolous flag and only newbies who have given you merit are supporting it.

I don’t care what you do on your own time, but kindly cut the crap about involving me in your drama.

If you want some solid advice, you should consider taking responsibility for your actions instead of blaming others when you act in ways that the community as a whole doesn’t like and you get caught.

In reality, the flag barely sense and is completely subjective, so I do get Lauda's argument of it's intent. "I believe" followed by "not based on user's opinion" is oxymoronic at best. The entire premise of the flag is based on opinion. Despite the accusations of merit farming and plagiarism, I don't believe there is a high risk of losing money from this user. I'd argue there's a 5-10% higher chance of losing money as it all seems "a bit dodgy", but I wouldn't classify this as "high risk". High risk should be reserved for scammers.

I'm sure other user's believe their alternative opinions for their own reasons.

Depends on your definition of "belief". I would be one to say that in order to honestly state that a position is true, then you would have to believe it... if you had doubt in the truthfulness of the statement, why would you deem it true? We can go into an epistemological dialogue about this but I see no issue with the wording.

Despite that, I don't personally like seeing a flag used here in lieu of a simple negative trust instead.

IS THIS ABUSE OR NOT?? depends how you want to twist it really... if laudas lies about being on the xcoin launch and no premine/instamine + extortion, + shady escrow + trust abuse or TMANS auction SCAMMING deceptions for direct financial gain are not worthy of red or tags LOLOLOL

Since the trust system is so fucked and lacks clear guidelines for lemons flags and red trust the subjectivity will obviously be exploited and the double standards will be pushed for personal gain.

I will agree with what lauda is claiming "Any kind of highly deceptive behaviour is flag-worthy, there is no going around this." IF he agrees to have this applied to his lies about being on the launch of xcoin and there being no instamine/premine. WHILST HOLDING HUGE BAGS OF IT and trying in various threads to shove that scamming shit coin out there as a fair and honest launch.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5131477.msg50628003#msg50628003

I mean ANY KIND OF DECEPTIVE BEHAVIOR is fucking retarded. Nullius has put he is 2 years old on his account? is that deceptive?? perhaps we can say do some mental gymnastics and claim this has financial gain in it?? what if he wants to get in with VOD or LFC?? I mean is he leveraging this age deception?? I mean sure he is about as smart as a 2 year old window licker from tmans gene pool, but that is not the point.

This kind of stupidity has to stop. Lauda and tman have told lies and been undeniable deceptive for FAR clearer and direct financial gain FFS. You other DT members look fucking pathetic and weak letting this croatian scum bag making you all look corrupt and scammy when you are just mostly pussies. haha

His unbelievable "undercover agents " extortion scheme.

His constant LIES regarding cryptohunter LYING, and then never being able to produce ANY solid evidence of a single lie CH told.

Tman's auction deception where he was caught red handed by OG. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5147938.msg51677057#msg51677057

ANY KIND of deception Lauda claims. Then flag this long over due scammer and shit stain. Get some balls DT members.

Also when did noobius become Laudas latest felching twat? was this member always such a pathetic slobbering ass licker of lauda or did his new fetish only kick off when that account was REACTIVATED.

Was there a password change. I mean when some member appears from huge time away and instantly starts supporting A SCAMMER like laudas clear agenda and using terms like "LAUDA AND ME" in his posts.. LOL yeah I will come back and work with the king of scammers whilst finding those seriously dangerous members who prepare answers to questions to get merits (apparently) or other pathetic slobbering reasons to give honest members red trust.

YES, this is abuse. I agree with the initial poster. NOT because the trust system SHOULD NOT be used in this way. BUT it is abuse because there is no consistent agreement on that and it gets USED IN THAT WAY by scammers and deceptive scum to simply punish others.

No lauda WHY should all deceptive behavior get red trust and lemons flags but yours and TMANs undeniable deceptive  and flat out scamming FOR DIRECT FINANCIAL GAIN get no punishment.

OF course you or your mongrel dog tman will answer and I am not interested in listening to noobius ass feltching twats flowery word salad spew excuses either.

Let's here YOUR excuses and why this is NOT abuse based on DOUBLE STANDARDS.

Also ieoeie or whatever that fucktard calls himself is a lying piece of trash. I do not see CH using this trust system to flag and tag all those that attacked him at all. Total lies.

The reader should examine this for themselves.

@actmyname - why is a lemons flag or even TYPE 3 flag any worse for the member than a red trust ?

All most members care about is there sig campaign status. Red trust is used by most CM to deny entry. Even if it is given for the most stupid of reasons that even that CM does not understand they will still mostly ask you to get the DT to remove it first LOL

To me this is abuse based again on the people supporting it should have flags of their own because their deception is in LESS DOUBT and there is a CLEAR DIRECT FINANCIAL GAIN in the cases of TMAN and LAUDA.

If suchmoon was not such a grumpy and bitchy woman she could be DT material. Of all the scumbags she seems to have NO financially motivated wrong doing, and NO clear cases of abusing the trust system. Has tackled at least a pretty big scam too. Only recently started sig spamming. A clear new improved version of her lately. Also has more balls that 99% of the guys on DT those wussy little girls all cringing away cowering and not daring to speak back to lauda and his core of scumbags.

Yes it is abuse currently. However, if ALL deceivers like TMAN and LAUDA are tagged and flagged we can say it is fair and therefore OKAY. Perhaps not sensible still UNLESS there is a CLEAR financial gain or wrong doing involved.

Just Shut up..Cheater, Merit hunter, You are an alt account of @Quickseller.
Here is the proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215097.msg53538429#msg53538429

Just get lost. Cheater, Merit hunter, Account Farmer.

There is not any proof get lost text spinner.

This is my thread. Who are you telling me to go out? You get lost stupid, poor illiterate noob.

I'm right in the middle on this one... It would appear this guy writes questions using alts and then answers with The-Devil. This is somewhat confirmed by these alts supporting his frivolous flags. Definitely not trustworthy behavior.

However, I don't think merit farming explicitly makes one "high risk" for trading. If it were trust farming on the other hand, then yes, I could see that being high risk behavior.

Either way, this guy has already been tagged, the jig is up -- I don't think he's gonna be executing any trades or asking for money here under that account.

Sorry guy -- your plan worked well, until it didn't.

Is it a good suggestion to delete the flags started by the banned members ?

I will show how it relates.

The-Devil getting banned soon as per the accusations here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215242.0) = All his fake flags getting deleted.

This would fulfil the overall purpose of an boycott from the community, and reduce the heck of opposing all of them.

"They are abusing power"
Then goes to create retaliatory feedback plus flags against different members. Just Imagine how the state of the forum will be if such a person also gets the "power" they keep talking about.

Instead of complaining around the forum which i believe will only worsen matters, try to be exemplary. It begins with you.

This case clearly shows the dualism of the forum. The user in question was supported by a lot of well-meaning members including myself when they thought him/her to be a well-meaning and devoted member. But when evidence pointing to the contrary surfaced it was also investigated and acted upon.

There has been a lot of drama in between the line, to whether the merit dump was deserved or the trust flag justified, but it is a system that checks itself and balances almost in the middle, most of the time. So the right decision is taking 'most of the time'.

The trust system is unmoderated and checks itself, so this should invariably create an environment of fairness. The evidence was presented and the majority agreed with it. It doesn't have to be dragged on.
Anyone can leave feedback on your profile just as you did in retaliatory feedbacks and only the person can reverse it, same in your case.

Some advice; don't leave retaliatory feedbacks out of spite, it doesn't help anything.
For now, you've not been banned, so you can use your time on the forum to show your net positive input to the forum, and check back in a couple of months for any possibility of changes to the situation.
Good luck with the forum.

You got busted. You can either learn from the experience or become a bitter troll. It looks like the latter is your preference but you need to try harder - the troll niche is quite crowded these days.

I'd say it's shady/deceptive and is obviously going to be frowned upon, but whether someone thinks that is worthy of a flag is up to them.


Never underestimate how sneaky and conniving people can be here. Anyone with a bit of cunning can quickly learn how to game the system here and many do, especially on the hunt for merit. We used to see it a lot with feedback/trust where people would seek out cheap trades with the right people just to build up some 'green' (and I'm sure it still happens).

What is your problem if my account gets banned? Oil your own machine. View your profile. You already have a signature ban because of signature abuse. Prepare yourself first then give a speech. You have only a big mouth. You have no other qualifications.

https://i.imgur.com/f4UfdZD.png

Indian Noob.

I am happy I don't seem as qualified as you to not understand the simple intend of using the flag system here. Get your frivolous flags off it is misuse of the system.



Nice, I atleast dragged something real out of you. Nice shades of darks you indicate in your creepy racist and low value thinking.

If things mentioned in that other thread are not already enough:




https://i.imgur.com/iNr0xw9.png

https://i.imgur.com/qtIYklz.png

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090579.0 some posts are missing in thread, but seems OP was scammed:

**




This thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5119455.0


Notes: "I dont send first, I never send first, I cant send first", some random capital letters:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2726750;sa=showPosts;start=80

and:



This: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg22334499#msg22334499


I don't even want to talk what I think of this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215915.msg53555650#msg53555650) account  ::)



Why do you think account The-Devil is not "high-risk"? Everything is inside that thread, including trust feedback of other accounts which lead to some other threads.

---

Edit:


Dafak is Lite Coin?

Not to mention "ferrari and golf are good. Audi is also good. But I like to drive golf. That is why I like golf"  ::)

---

(** edit2)

The BIGGER question is why should we not consider YOU MORONBOZO as high risk??

I mean someone that goes to this much trouble for this kind of newbie low level borderline financially dangerous to prove or rather present reasonable case they are the same person.

BUT you totally support others with FAR STRONGER DIRECT FINANCIALLY HIGH RISK BEHAVIORS.

That makes YOU HIGH RISK.

This also DOES mean you are abusing this forum and the initial poster with DOUBLE STANDARDS you are scamming in effect.

You are PRETENDING and DECEIVING that you CARE about high risk to honest members BUT YOU DO NOT CARE AT ALL because you are supporting lauda, tman and nutildah who have ALL committed undeniable deception for direct financial reward in one way or another and ALL have abused the trust of honest members who have attempted to bring that to the attention of other honest members.

If you really cared about HIGH RISK to other members you would be spending all of this energy INVESTIGATING your pals lauda, tman and nutildah and getting them punished. Why are you NOT?? a touchy point I am sure.

The reader needs to consider this carefully and weigh this AGAINST what can be proven about the INITIAL POSTER who is claiming this is abuse. I totally agree this is abuse of the trust system. Forcing double standards inside the trust system is ABUSE and scamming.

UNDENIABLE hence why nobody dare tackle this point.

I mean moronbozo is said to control the zorrobeck account. I notice as SOON as it was mentioned by someone that marlboroza was NOT PERMITTED to post on their self moderated thread ZORROBECK turns up LOL
MORONBOZO told QS that ONLY video evidence of him using both accounts would be acceptable as proof. Perhaps all should share these high standards of proof he himself demands???  is this MORE double standards??

The trust system is simply a weapon a lot of scammers use to control their DT powers, merit allocations and rev stream control here. In other words it is all one big GAMED AND ABUSED SCAM which ensure the status quo of entrenched ABUSERS is maintained.

Debunk this or eat shit and accept you ARE abusing the trust system AND the initial poster.

Getting warmer. If this post was the reference for the flag I probably wouldn't oppose it. I still dislike creating a flag first and coming up with evidence later.

Flag came after investigations https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215242.msg53552254#msg53552254. Evidence is mostly in morvilz7z's post (Only thing m didn't mention(or I missed it) are bunch of newbie accounts in loan threads). Please take a look:

Account coin-desk -> trust page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2507716 -> reference to account raffie35 -> trust page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2500042 -> reference to accounts "Rafie35/Rifat/Lafaka" -> trust page https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1138127 -> reference to some other accounts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1702409.msg22334499#msg22334499 / untrusted feedback -> reference to loan thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090579.msg48973938#msg48973938 -> just one post under is Devid's post (it is in screenshot of my first post in thread which OP mentioned) and so on...

Oh.
https://i.imgur.com/XQzdA8J.png
It should be in topic. I completely forgot. Withdrawing support now. Thread should be updated for flag, then I will support it.

Dude.. give it up now. You tried, I fell for it. Others saw, investigated and now your account is fucked, why not head on over to bitcoin.com I am sure ver and his cronies aren’t as bright as the boys and girls in this place.

So fork off to bitcoin.com you skinny forker

Fair enough. Let me try with pictures then (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1319678.1160):

https://i.imgur.com/NJ3XRfN.png

"how to get one?" Lol! That shouldn't have been quoted. Nop? Still nothing? Hm, let's try different approach then. Only few posts above 3 not-alt accounts, 2 other accounts joined giveaway:

https://i.imgur.com/KoQaDb4.png

Morrisgonzalez shilled here:

...and it reminded me of this post (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111069.msg50904981#msg50904981) (scroll down to "shilling for stake" part.

No, sorry, this is exactly something like this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5111069.msg50928921#msg50928921 !

Aaand, oh, what are the odds:


Not only that Geoffrey quoted morrisgonzales, they also typed "Astronaut is man in space. Space is up. So astronaut is up." type of post. Of course, why wouldn't they receive merit for that topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081513.0) from "one of the accounts".

According to https://bpip.org/search.aspx?q=morrisgonzalez is banned.


Just lolz:

We really sometimes create mistakes, the only thing we should do is learn from it... There are too many cons in this times nowadays...
One of the saddest thig I've ever seen from the old guy. 😂

---

Oh well, Did You Know?(Even if you lots dont care, I,too dont care! 😂)
Its my Damn Birthday Today! And Guess what?! It about to end, so nothing serious about this, in the end Trolls will be Toys 😂😊

https://i.ibb.co/3mKSpKV/Screenshot-20200113-162950-Chrome.jpg (https://ibb.co/YBgfcgJ)
upload photos online (https://imgbb.com/)

Eh, at least he wasn’t the absolute centrepiece in a forum sex scandal over a scammer who fooled multiple intelligent people from theymos on down.  I retain that unfortunate distinguishment all for myself (though it was his +10 on alia which originally brought him/her/it to my attention—hrrrumph).  I doubt that this thread will run for five dozen pages, determined though The-Devil may be to attempt keeping it alive.  A bad character was revealed, TMAN’s +50 is now in an account tantamount to a burn address, and TMAN will probably be more careful about whom he merit-bombs between F-bombs.

So, it’s sad that TMAN got had; but he handled it in a stand-up way.  Meanwhile, I see that a dishonest dirtbag already caught in numerous lies is treating marlboroza’s evidence to the fantastic rebuttal of “deny, deny, deny”—yawn.  Scambusters will continue to investigate, no doubt uncovering more foulness; and this thread will eventually dribble off, leaving buried therein an off-hand comment revealing a datum far more important than such useless vile trash as The-Devil:  Birthday cake.


Well, a slightly belated happy birthday to you!

I didn’t know that the forum gave virtual cake.  I will must needs watch for my cake on 29 March, my account’s birthday—I entered my account registration date as my date of birth, for reason of anonymity.  And I would not want to miss cake. :-)

/me hungers for cake—but will accept cookies, too, because Tor Browser munches them down without letting them be used to link sessions.  Delicious!

How many times a man could repeat same mistakes? You should know what is the mistake and definition of mistake exactly.
https://i.imgur.com/i03RljZ.jpg

You are apologising and on the other hand your title say they are abusing power. Can you explain it if you done multiple crime and judge send you jail then will you say that judge/police abuse their power? How could you expect that someone will excuse instantly after apologies? When you have done mistakes then you should change posting behaviour before make appeals or apologies. By wrong blame, you just drawn attention from more DT members and getting more tag.

Actually this is the result of quick merit scheme. You have chosen a shady way to earn merit quickly which is really punishable in my opinion. You should not create arguments if you are really not legit. You know very well what you have done. If I were you, then I would first change my posting behaviour instead of blame to DT members. This isn't right way to apologies, your thread and title conflicts each other.

I think TMAN made a mistake by not knowing that you are not a decent poster. TMAN wouldn't reply for the 50 merits that has been sent to you. If you really did not copy paste then you have nothing to worry but if you did then good luck what happens next. Besr of luck.