Bitcoin Forum

Hello, everyone, I've had some instances with a couple of new accounts, where they are spamming my campaign thread and also my personal thread. It is getting a bit annoying now since they are quoting OP, spamming the thread with insults and basically making life difficult. Is this to be considered trolling, and if that is a bannable offense
Accounts in question.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1193745

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1174000 (This one hasn't posted anything yet)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1173973

Handling trolling will be taken on a case by case basis. Trizgayboy is proxy banned and I nuked the other two since they're obviously just throwaway troll accounts of butthurt shitposters who you rejected.

The forum should be doing that more often IMO. Allowing stuff like this is just damaging for everyone, the people who are being bullied, the users, the services and ultimately the forum (which is already in a bad state).

Thank you! I will keep pming you about any more cases of this, instead of making new threads, and thank you for deleting their posts.

@OP don't expect 'butthurt people/trolls' to get banned if you have full-blown criminals on this site who are not banned yet. The above poster (LAUDA) is a good example of people that continue to be here despite having been caught in illegal schemes: Lauda/TMAN/minifrij extortion attempt  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0). Given the fact that this is a serious crime, trolls are probably the least to worry about.

Nuff said.

Your argument is invalid.

Just because person X posts about crime Y doesn't make crime Y any less severe. The extortion happened and it is illegal in both Austria (where Lauda lives now) as well as in Croatia (where he was born).  If/when convicted jail time is the consequence. Quickseller or any other scammer/defrauder posting about it doesn't change the hard facts in the slightest.

As mentioned bad cases of trolls are dealt with by the moderators of this forum and I have seen it happening efficiently. Scammers, however, are not banned.

Ironically, you prove this not to be the case given that you're a troll derailing this thread with fake information about something that isn't even relevant. ::)/me takes a sip of Marsian wine.

When all you got left is the criminal card. :D

To be honest, I think Lauda actually lives on Mars, wouldn't you agree Lauda?
That extortion attempt was blown heavily out of proportion by Quickseller and his legion of alt accounts.

So you're admitting to a knowing that a known scammer reported someone? Doesn't that seem a bit incorrect to you?

Known scammer--- Reports trusted person---- Must be true!!!  ??? ??? ???
 
As it's said. It was blown out of proportion.

---

Now, just because person X negs you for being a deep onion shill, doesn't make the crime any less true.

Please refer me to false information.

In light of facts it is not important what you think.

This is your personal opinion and not a fact.

I do not fully understand your sentence. I was simply proving that your argument is invalid.

If I were to tell you everything that was wrong, then you'd might actually get closer to finding out where I am but aTriz got it pretty much figured out. Then again, Mars is pretty big. :D

He/she/they don't care about a well known and chronic criminal such as Quickseller yet try to play the moral/legal card here. Obviously they have no standing ground whatsoever considering their absurd and outright pathetic bias. A type of concern trolling that isn't being banned, unfortunately.

This reply is completely worthless. First you claim that there is false information and immediately after you claim that you can not say what is false or what is true.

As a known extortionist you sure have a big mouth. Have you not yet realized the very same applies to you?

Honestly, mate if you're so mad about this  Lauda/TMAN/minifrij extortion attempt, you might as well just go find a couple of lawyers and sue them. This fact your complaining on a forum about something about this just shows how it is completely false.

Why should or shouldn't I tell you anything for free? Maybe, someone else will pop up and claim they've been dealing with me. Try buying information from them (again). :D

It doesn't even remotely apply to me. Learn the definition of chronic offender. Education doesn't seem to be one of your strong features.

Minifrij has absolutely nothing to do with it, and Quickseller still refuses to change that title. Even shorena stated that minifrij is not involved, and they're literally the only *legitimate* person standing on the wrong side with the criminal & his alts. Such a lying hypocrite, that Quickseller. :-\

Just create self-moderated threads (at least for your personal thread).
That would reduce clutter and take care of this problem as well.

The point is that you are trying to play the 'moral/legal card' (as stated countlessly by yourself) despite being a known extortionist = criminal. Whether you are a chronic or habitual offender is of little importance. Comments like these do not help your case but make it worse.

If you claim there is fake/false information it is your job to prove it wrong. Anything else is gibberish.

Thank you for this suggestion. Rest assured there are more than one persons working on preparing the lawsuit indeed.

You're a funny guy. I'll also invite Satoshi to come watch Lauda get arrested.

I would urgently reccommend, also to delete this thread with proven false accusation.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2243173.0

Stating that there's almost no difference between single time criminal offender and a chronic just shows your lack of education and your bullshit. Keep drinking the kool-aid, but that ain't gonna help you get a better degree than high school. :D

https://media.tenor.com/images/f86c3a13ddb998631efa393d1c289567/tenor.gif

I take it that it has not been removed because so many people already replied to it.

Classic argumentum ad hominem. Playing stupid on purpose, are we?

It is indeed of little importance whether you are a habitual or chronic criminal as the point is that you, 'LaudaM', are a proven extortionist (criminal). What sort of offender is important regarding your prosecution only, not regarding the issue or argument.

There is no ad hominem here. Fallacies are beyond your level, you should avoid using them.

Nope. That's a continued lie (read sting operation) that is being pushed ad naseum by Quickseller & co out of spite. Maybe it is time to leave that basement and get a life? ::)

Thank you for proving that you are a liar too.

You need help? Sure: argumentum ad hominem, is 'where an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself':


There is no reason to answer this way unless desperately trying to distract from the actual substance.

Nope.

For this to be true, you'd need to have: a) An argument. b) Something worth rebutting. c) (My) Intent to to do so. Neither one is the case, especially not a and b. :)

To distract from the fact that you're a butthurt troll that needs to be banned? Now why would I want to do that? :o

Gibberish quoted. Let us know when you are back to the substance.

Again, attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself:

Reminder:
-->

Tell us: extortionists/criminals do NOT hurt the forum? What right does a criminal have to play the police here? Make sure to post a valid reply.

Wait, wasn't barwizi sending the police to Lauda's house? Scary stuff... *facepalm*

---

Above all, there is a large difference between a sting operation and an extortionist. Explain this to me: Why would Lauda spend so much time finding scammers and negging them if she/ he could in fact join them and make money behind closed doors (secretly is what I mean). Also, why does Lauda often bust/ help bust scam ICOs with cryptodevil if, once again, he or she could join in on the ICO and make money off them by not exposing them, essentially blackmailing them.

However, you see none of that happening, do you?

I don't see that happening, and I do believe Lauda's 'extortion attempt'
was a sting operation.  You either believe it or you don't.  Lauda's good works
outweigh that little lapse of good judgement.

However, regarding the logic of the above statement.  Quickseller spent a lot of
time scam busting....and then he pulled his escrow scam on a bunch of unwitting
victims who thought they were purchasing an escrow service with an independent
third party.  You know, a real escrow.  As in, a 3-sided transaction.  So just
because someone tries to bust scammers doesn't mean that person is not or would
not become one.  You never know.

None of that matters, nor does the shill care about anyone actually engaging in any scammy/shady actions or similar. That's what happens when you end up on the wrong end of negative ratings. ::)

I think that it is fair to say that a number of people trust me on a much higher level than ever before.

Quickseller is a prime example of someone who deceived the public and who showed his true colors after his crimes were exposed.

Wrong. You are lying again.


As seen here once again it's typical behavior of Lauda not to directly reply to the substance at all and trying to deceive by attacking others.

On another note it does not matter whether 'a number of people trust you (sic) on a much higher level than ever before', as criminals too have friends and partners who may trust them. This argument, again, is completely worthless.

Let's repeat it over and over again until you get it:



You are a proven criminal and a brazen hypocrite for trying to play the forum police. So far you have not been able to make a single valid argument justifying your position.

Answer the above bolded question. For your instance it's a simple no/yes question and does not demand any further gibberish.

4 days have passed - no reply.  Ignoring the substance will not work.
Reminder: Tell us, extortionists/criminals do NOT hurt the forum? Should criminals have the right to play the forum police here? Answer the above bolded question. It's a yes/no question.

To those who're new: LaudaM was caught in an extortionist crime which is illegal both in his birth country Croatia as well as in Austria where he currently lives. At the same time Lauda's profile remains in Bitcointalk's Default Trust, allowing a criminal to blemish other users profiles. There has not been any solid argument as to why LaudaM should not be removed from default trust and tagged appropriately like any other criminal.

Edit: 1 week has passed

It's a stupid, loaded question anyway.  Lauda doesn't have to answer to you or your alt accounts who keep bumping this dead horse issue.

Nobodt gives a shit about this anymore except butthurt whiners like you.  Everyone else has long moved on.  As much as quickseller is a scammer, having perpetrated a significant escrow scam which he'll never live down, we've moved on from the point of creating and bumping threads about it.  He got severely negged, and Lauda didn't.  The community has spoken.   You lost this one, let it go already.

Extortion is a serious crime and far from a dead horse issue.


Your biased opinion is irrelevant. I suppose Lauda can speak for himself.

Are extortionists/criminals not hurting the forum?
Should extortionists/criminals be included in Default Trust?
Should criminals have the right to play the forum police here?

Your opinion is even more biased and more irrelevant, since this is a dead issue.  But you go ahead and keep waiting with whatever trap you're hoping to spring.  I'm telling you why you're not getting an answer, but you're so busy beating this dead horse that you won't listen to reason.  Quickseller.

This is nothing more than your biased personal opinion. I repeat, extortion is a serious crime and far from a dead horse issue.

Your argument is completely worthless as one particular person (whoever that may be) posting about a crime does not in any way make the crime committed by the other person less severe or irrelevant. This logic of yours is entirely flawed.

Again, gibberish is not required. Lauda can speak for himself and there is a simple question to answer.

Every post that does not answer the above question/s is obvious distraction from the substance.