|
Title: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: ScamViruS on October 13, 2019, 12:27:32 PM When I saw the ann thread of lohncontrol.com (http://lohncontrol.com), one of my words was OMG! Hundreds of newbie accounts are bumping their ann thread everyday.
It is like one liner post's flood! Looks like ann bumpers paradise in this place. Good project, don't do this kind of thing. All newbie account with which bumps lohncontrol's ann thread, usually all these accounts are involved with ann bumping service. Ann bumping is their main work imo. It is understandable if you check their post history.When you check their post history you will see all their posts are ann bumping. I think all these account should be banned from bitcointalk. And this project should be flag/tag for doing illegal work on bitcointalk. Ann Thread:- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5146615.0 Ann Thread creator:- lohncontrol (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2607755) Thread archive:- http://archive.is/IZjQj For Example some members post history:- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=929867;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1189555;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1798732;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=665718;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1798732;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=489628;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1049944;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=838898;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1005343;sa=showPosts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=729778;sa=showPosts There are about 500-600 accounts involved in this bumping flood.It is not an easy task to give post history of all accounts. https://i.ibb.co/x38CRwC/1-pic.png https://i.ibb.co/RY3s8Hn/pic2.png Title: Re: Ann Thread bumping with hundreds of newbie accounts. Post by: hosseinimr93 on October 13, 2019, 12:49:08 PM Any user spam the forum should be reported. But they are beating a dead horse. Newbies are no longer able to bump the threads with making those useless posts. The new bumping system has made such efforts ineffective.
The topic you mentioned is now on third page of "Announcements (Altcoins)" board. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: Bttzed03 on October 13, 2019, 01:09:23 PM They are still at it ;D
Many of these new start ups are still unaware of the new system. They are only wasting money hiring some "bitcointalk growth hackers". Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: ScamViruS on October 13, 2019, 01:51:34 PM They are still at it ;D Many of these new start ups are still unaware of the new system. They are only wasting money hiring some "bitcointalk growth hackers". Yes. Almost all projects want to make their project popular with everyone as soon as possible. So they use different techniques. Some greedy people offer this kind of bumping service by misleading them. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: rhomelmabini on October 13, 2019, 02:19:19 PM They are still at it ;D Exactly, their bumping powers are not that much and even if they posted and posted as they are newbies that won't do much to make their thread be at the first page or make it at top of it unless there are some fraudster who'll sell their bump score to this greedy projects just to make them atop.Many of these new start ups are still unaware of the new system. They are only wasting money hiring some "bitcointalk growth hackers". Still, those are annoying to see maybe you can report it in this thread: [CLUB] The SpamBusters! Busting rule-breakers for more than a year. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4720640.0) and I guess mods will take care of that thread. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: sujonali1819 on October 13, 2019, 03:07:45 PM It is highly possible that they were hired by lohncontrol. I visited several pages of the end of that lohncontrol's Ann thread and found the most surprising thing is that most of Newbie's account was open long ago. And I saw some of them 2018 some 2017 some 2015, even some are 2013. So it is very doubtful that the accounts are more likely to be accounts of a few high ranked members of this forum.
Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: npredtorch on October 13, 2019, 06:37:18 PM The same thing is happening in Credits ANN topic.
It's actually a self-moderated topic but, I don't think the OP doesn't view it as a spam. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2340 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2360 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2380 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2400 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2420 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2440 Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: Harlot on October 13, 2019, 06:44:50 PM The project devs are either not updated with the new bumping system in the forum or are being fooled by bumping services by convincing them that newbies posting in their thread are bumping their ANN threads on top of the list. Either way I don't think there is a quick solution for this and the only solution I see is them figuring it out on their own that their threads are not going on in the ANN section and the bump service they paid are basically worthless. They would eventually die down and we would see less and less of this newbie accounts creating fake conversations as a racket to earn money in BCT.
Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: Welsh on October 13, 2019, 06:58:23 PM Most of the users that have posted there have already been banned, but the posts remain.
It is highly possible that they were hired by lohncontrol. I visited several pages of the end of that lohncontrol's Ann thread and found the most surprising thing is that most of Newbie's account was open long ago. And I saw some of them 2018 some 2017 some 2015, even some are 2013. So it is very doubtful that the accounts are more likely to be accounts of a few high ranked members of this forum. A lot of the users post in the same threads in the same order. Seems like this bumping service is being used by multiple projects. Some of the posts have been pretty much copied, and pasted with slight variations making me further believe that they are all connected. The project devs are either not updated with the new bumping system in the forum or are being fooled by bumping services by convincing them that newbies posting in their thread are bumping their ANN threads on top of the list. Either way I don't think there is a quick solution for this and the only solution I see is them figuring it out on their own that their threads are not going on in the ANN section and the bump service they paid are basically worthless. They would eventually die down and we would see less and less of this newbie accounts creating fake conversations as a racket to earn money in BCT. Its bad from a spam point of view from the forum, but also a good way for outing scam projects. I'd like to think that any legitimate service would avoid doing this themselves or hiring someone to do it for them. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: DaveF on October 13, 2019, 07:21:52 PM Most of the users that have posted there have already been banned, but the posts remain. Why? I would think it would be better to trash their posts too. Just my view, but it would make the thread more empty which is kind of the point in preventing spam. At least in my opinion. I'd like to think that any legitimate service would avoid doing this themselves or hiring someone to do it for them. Do you also believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? Seriously, people are going to try every trick in the book to get their thread bumped and due to the amount of crap in those boards they try everything they can think of to move their posts up. Otherwise even the best project is going to get buried. Non-publicity of data For now, I am intentionally not making it public who bumped each topic, since that way you can't prove that you bumped anything, and this may prevent people from selling their bumps as easily. I don't particularly object to making the approximate bump scores or bump powers public, but I didn't do this yet. I would like to say I am very surprised that nobody of the higher posts / ranks has gotten PMs about I'll give you "X" BTC to post in / bump my thread. That or if they did nobody has discussed it in the open. [Note for people who need a bumping I can be bought...2BTC and I'll hit bump for you....just kidding....or am I?] I know theymos has and I assume other mods have the data as to who hit bump, would be interesting to see. I know I did on one altcoin project that I like. -Dave Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: LoyceV on October 13, 2019, 08:48:05 PM When I saw the ann thread of lohncontrol.com (http://lohncontrol.com), one of my words was OMG! Hundreds of newbie accounts are bumping their ann thread everyday. The listThe following users have posted x times in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5146615.0 This does not mean they're all bad users. Merit is based on last Friday's data dump (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3078328.new#new). I only show Merit if there has been at least 1 transaction. If it shows 0 Merit, that means the user has sent Merit, but didn't receive anything. Trust is only shown if it's non-neutral. 1. 15x (Newbie) zavodchik (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=772446) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=zavodchik)) 2. 11x (Newbie) edibala (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=883595) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=edibala)) 3. 11x (Newbie) Vik_theholder (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1744118) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Vik_theholder)) 4. 10x (Newbie) rajshukla1986 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=947798) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rajshukla1986)) 5. 9x (Newbie) shadowofraam (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=902802) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=shadowofraam)) 6. 9x (Newbie) bocha1964 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=351551) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bocha1964)) 7. 9x (Newbie) pprimorac (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=332446) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pprimorac)) 8. 9x (Newbie) okele23 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1097602) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=okele23)) 9. 8x (Newbie) masky84 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=883120) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=masky84)) 10. 8x (Newbie) Mscris (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=779239) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Mscris)) 11. 8x (Newbie) amstaf36 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1047751) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=amstaf36)) 12. 7x (Newbie) PaladinsOfAquarion (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=911054) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=PaladinsOfAquarion)) 13. 7x (Newbie) antoniocabelo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=886338) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=antoniocabelo)) 14. 7x (Newbie) sularno (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=851955) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=sularno)) 15. 7x (Newbie) tiest56 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=809319) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tiest56)) 16. 7x (Newbie) pippus65 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=480286) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=pippus65)) 17. 7x (Newbie) atillahan0827 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=405957) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=atillahan0827)) 18. 7x (Newbie) DogeCoin2014 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=195841) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=DogeCoin2014)) 19. 7x (Copper Member) lohncontrol (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2607755) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lohncontrol)) 20. 6x (Newbie) odoziaku (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=973785) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=odoziaku)) 21. 6x (Newbie) Yurikmonstro (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=941422) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Yurikmonstro)) 22. 6x (Newbie) gembeldolar (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=936912) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gembeldolar)) 23. 6x (Newbie) araishkhan (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=916701) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=araishkhan)) 24. 6x (Newbie) riz1raj (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=821576) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=riz1raj)) 25. 6x (Newbie) omagaman37 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=352715) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=omagaman37)) 26. 6x (Newbie) darkware (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=158403) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=darkware)) 27. 6x (Newbie) mazyarkhalvati (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1365212) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mazyarkhalvati)) 28. 6x (Newbie) debugx7 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1301101) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=debugx7)) 29. 6x (Newbie) JOVELYN78 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1239587) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=JOVELYN78)) 30. 6x (Newbie) Rahat786 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1115594) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Rahat786)) 31. 6x (Newbie) rksandhu (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1062617) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rksandhu)) 32. 5x (Newbie) homecyber (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=510119) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=homecyber)) 33. 5x (Newbie) easywork (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=356903) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=356903) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=easywork)) 34. 5x (Newbie) tatyana (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=352414) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tatyana)) 35. 5x (Newbie) djras1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1864332) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1864332) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=djras1)) 36. 5x (Newbie) gunpal5 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1510428) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gunpal5)) 37. 5x (Newbie) frankfm (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1310183) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=frankfm)) 38. 5x (Newbie) waltinho0807 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1150937) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=waltinho0807)) 39. 4x (Newbie) venanboy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=981835) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=981835) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=venanboy)) 40. 4x (Newbie) faiziimemon (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=965379) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=faiziimemon)) 41. 4x (Newbie) markiz7601 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=943535) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=943535) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=markiz7601)) 42. 4x (Newbie) banipunz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=881053) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=banipunz)) 43. 4x (Newbie) BELINDA ROMERO (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=838898) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BELINDA ROMERO)) 44. 4x (Newbie) Brentmen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=717193) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Brentmen)) 45. 4x (Newbie) Elm0P2 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=716982) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Elm0P2)) 46. 4x (Newbie) lilyomer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=690494) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=690494) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lilyomer)) 47. 4x (Newbie) arunvinud (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=66321) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=arunvinud)) 48. 4x (Newbie) yats (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=564634) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=yats)) 49. 4x (Newbie) danivegas83 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=396867) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=396867) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=danivegas83)) 50. 4x (Newbie) jk29 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=373995) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=373995) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jk29)) 51. 4x (Newbie) andress5621 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=260463) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=andress5621)) 52. 4x (Newbie) FredZ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=208417) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=FredZ)) 53. 4x (Newbie) hornet77730 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1896693) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=hornet77730)) 54. 4x (Newbie) Malix1818 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=184115) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=184115) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Malix1818)) 55. 4x (Newbie) hamzaarkha (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1793378) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=hamzaarkha)) 56. 4x (Newbie) wolfw (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1375416) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=wolfw)) 57. 4x (Newbie) jgh7d7 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1082177) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jgh7d7)) 58. 4x (Newbie) Devilboy123 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1066858) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1066858) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Devilboy123)) 59. 4x (Newbie) lisovoy28 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1011767) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lisovoy28)) 60. 3x (Newbie) bigservicesinfo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=976260) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bigservicesinfo)) 61. 3x (Newbie) vesza (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=969160) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=vesza)) 62. 3x (Newbie) gajapathik (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=924260) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gajapathik)) 63. 3x (Newbie) BungTrader (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=880010) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BungTrader)) 64. 3x (Newbie) donkeyramp (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=824465) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=824465) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=donkeyramp)) 65. 3x (Newbie) cypaz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=71829) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=cypaz)) 66. 3x (Newbie) Qasya5 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=704056) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=704056) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Qasya5)) 67. 3x (Newbie) msscard (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=648290) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=msscard)) 68. 3x (Newbie) dawidzet (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=553443) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=553443) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=dawidzet)) 69. 3x (Newbie) cleotobias14 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=523324) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=cleotobias14)) 70. 3x (Newbie) Mans (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=469510) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Mans)) 71. 3x (Newbie) baymax (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=469147) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=469147) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=baymax)) 72. 3x (Newbie) ILSad23 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=467246) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ILSad23)) 73. 3x (Newbie) dordanut (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=374113) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=dordanut)) 74. 3x (Newbie) BARBARA61 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=369660) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=369660) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BARBARA61)) 75. 3x (Newbie) superollieworld (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=348554) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=348554) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=superollieworld)) 76. 3x (Newbie) shajeershahul (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1798732) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=shajeershahul)) 77. 3x (Newbie) rakesh.k (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1758534) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=rakesh.k)) 78. 3x (Newbie) olegsiziy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1714457) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=olegsiziy)) 79. 3x (Newbie) serzik2759 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1194325) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=serzik2759)) 80. 3x (Newbie) emrancba (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1069557) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=emrancba)) 81. 3x (Newbie) macmac49 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1058285) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1058285) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=macmac49)) 82. 3x (Newbie) emmaabbey01 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1031004) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=emmaabbey01)) 83. 3x (Newbie) Arashflash44 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1022128) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1022128) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Arashflash44)) 84. 3x (Newbie) Diamant84 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1009629) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Diamant84)) 85. 3x (Newbie) velier (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1009551) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=velier)) 86. 3x (Newbie) 87. 3x (Newbie) 88. 2x (Newbie) muhnawi (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=925006) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=muhnawi)) 89. 2x (Newbie) yoyolex (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=894214) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=yoyolex)) 90. 2x (Newbie) Haseebu431 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=867721) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Haseebu431)) 91. 2x (Newbie) Yomotsu (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=866359) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Yomotsu)) 92. 2x (Newbie) matherafa (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=831879) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=matherafa)) 93. 2x (Newbie) gsmgwapo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=826151) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gsmgwapo)) 94. 2x (Newbie) goodparty (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=814015) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=goodparty)) 95. 2x (Newbie) namtih016 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=774709) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=namtih016)) 96. 2x (Newbie) Aprian999 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=761028) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Aprian999)) 97. 2x (Newbie) ligade (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=729778) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ligade)) 98. 2x (Newbie) fedjandra (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=665014) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=fedjandra)) 99. 2x (Newbie) kawaiikitty (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=637672) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=kawaiikitty)) 100. 2x (Newbie) kidd24 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=552897) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=552897) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=kidd24)) 101. 2x (Newbie) travis011688 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=547686) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=travis011688)) 102. 2x (Newbie) milad1994 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=544384) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=milad1994)) 103. 2x (Newbie) Zylicx (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=542704) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Zylicx)) 104. 2x (Newbie) tusma111 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=530692) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=530692) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tusma111)) 105. 2x (Newbie) phenom-eno (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=474014) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=474014) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=phenom-eno)) 106. 2x (Newbie) Roscokov (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=230170) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Roscokov)) 107. 2x (Newbie) hotboykm (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1796647) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1796647) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=hotboykm)) 108. 2x (Newbie) seselakhdari (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1763287) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1763287) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=seselakhdari)) 109. 2x (Newbie) STiCKSTOFF91 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1380391) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1380391) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=STiCKSTOFF91)) 110. 2x (Newbie) arnos19 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1324182) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=arnos19)) 111. 2x (Newbie) sfisomaaphula (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1236332) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=sfisomaaphula)) 112. 2x (Newbie) InSide24 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1228941) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=InSide24)) 113. 2x (Newbie) matr1x33 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1226974) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1226974) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=matr1x33)) 114. 2x (Newbie) artem1984gora (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1166877) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=artem1984gora)) 115. 2x (Newbie) Rehyl (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1055370) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Rehyl)) 116. 2x (Newbie) Airy (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1001973) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Airy)) 117. 2x (Newbie) 118. 2x (Newbie) 119. 2x (Newbie) 120. 2x (Newbie) 121. 2x (Newbie) 122. 2x (Newbie) 123. 2x (Newbie) 124. 2x (Newbie) 125. 2x (Newbie) 126. 2x (Jr. Member) 127. 1x (Sr. Member) markovonline (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1001285) (3 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1001285.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=markovonline)) 128. 1x (Newbie) mashashak (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=978658) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mashashak)) 129. 1x (Newbie) elishamasih (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=967771) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=elishamasih)) 130. 1x (Newbie) skryptsoff (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=929018) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=skryptsoff)) 131. 1x (Newbie) traxer112 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=907822) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=907822) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=traxer112)) 132. 1x (Newbie) stalmer (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=907618) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=stalmer)) 133. 1x (Newbie) moutaztahhan (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=902625) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=moutaztahhan)) 134. 1x (Newbie) sugafre (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=900847) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=900847) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=sugafre)) 135. 1x (Newbie) Sarwo Cuakep (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=894261) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Sarwo Cuakep)) 136. 1x (Newbie) glenqwe1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=864931) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=glenqwe1)) 137. 1x (Newbie) josealbitres (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=860064) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=josealbitres)) 138. 1x (Newbie) Dc147 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=839779) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=839779) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Dc147)) 139. 1x (Newbie) GGabox (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=812866) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=812866) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=GGabox)) 140. 1x (Newbie) zjgirt (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=803281) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=803281) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=zjgirt)) 141. 1x (Newbie) BOBSA11D (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=776429) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=776429) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=BOBSA11D)) 142. 1x (Newbie) temo8833 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=772129) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=temo8833)) 143. 1x (Newbie) qqnauta (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=700079) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=700079) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=qqnauta)) 144. 1x (Newbie) bhn.deven (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=547385) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=bhn.deven)) 145. 1x (Newbie) carlos2015 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=542428) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=carlos2015)) 146. 1x (Newbie) robstar210 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=512455) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=512455) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=robstar210)) 147. 1x (Newbie) RiceRocca (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=470575) (Trust: (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=470575) +0 / =0 / -1) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=RiceRocca)) 148. 1x (Newbie) Afaqad (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=416109) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Afaqad)) 149. 1x (Newbie) stewartrico (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=401087) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=stewartrico)) 150. 1x (Newbie) emils2013 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=389376) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=emils2013)) 151. 1x (Newbie) ris (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=370978) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ris)) 152. 1x (Newbie) lyudmich56 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=367639) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lyudmich56)) 153. 1x (Newbie) shibenik (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=353657) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=shibenik)) 154. 1x (Newbie) neoneomimi (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2670666) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=neoneomimi)) 155. 1x (Newbie) mipo5 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2660859) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mipo5)) 156. 1x (Newbie) Boardmangetpaid (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2655941) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Boardmangetpaid)) 157. 1x (Newbie) spookimann (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2601642) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=spookimann)) 158. 1x (Newbie) HodlerKing101 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2599365) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=HodlerKing101)) 159. 1x (Newbie) musta12 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2594398) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=musta12)) 160. 1x (Newbie) danirpm (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=258691) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=danirpm)) 161. 1x (Newbie) alecost1980 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2516428) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=alecost1980)) 162. 1x (Newbie) kyulckyungs (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2352012) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=kyulckyungs)) 163. 1x (Newbie) jayca51 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=222181) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=jayca51)) 164. 1x (Newbie) KingSpycrab (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=204754) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=KingSpycrab)) 165. 1x (Newbie) gabrieljony (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1926057) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gabrieljony)) 166. 1x (Newbie) ulasbilgi (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=191621) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=ulasbilgi)) 167. 1x (Newbie) juasmaricon (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1802388) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=juasmaricon)) 168. 1x (Newbie) luisfg99 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=144121) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=luisfg99)) 169. 1x (Newbie) handhsm (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1176533) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=handhsm)) 170. 1x (Newbie) alysia (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1169827) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=alysia)) 171. 1x (Newbie) crot21 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1129054) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=crot21)) 172. 1x (Newbie) gold2017 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1123505) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=gold2017)) 173. 1x (Newbie) vakubcuk (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1116753) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=vakubcuk)) 174. 1x (Newbie) Nastka (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1069821) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Nastka)) 175. 1x (Newbie) anzela67 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1060716) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=anzela67)) 176. 1x (Newbie) alan1903 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1049944) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=alan1903)) 177. 1x (Newbie) mudiadamz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1005343) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=mudiadamz)) 178. 1x (Newbie) 179. 1x (Newbie) 180. 1x (Newbie) 181. 1x (Newbie) 182. 1x (Newbie) 183. 1x (Newbie) 184. 1x (Newbie) 185. 1x (Newbie) 186. 1x (Newbie) 187. 1x (Newbie) 188. 1x (Newbie) 189. 1x (Newbie) 190. 1x (Newbie) 191. 1x (Newbie) 192. 1x (Newbie) 193. 1x (Newbie) 194. 1x (Newbie) 195. 1x (Newbie) 196. 1x (Newbie) 197. 1x (Newbie) 198. 1x (Newbie) 199. 1x (Newbie) 200. 1x (Newbie) 201. 1x (Newbie) 202. 1x (Newbie) 203. 1x (Member) Laskoo (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2504426) (15 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/2504426.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Laskoo)) 204. 1x (Member) tonyvo2017 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1515216) (10 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1515216.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tonyvo2017)) 205. 1x (Member) 206. 1x (Legendary) AmoreJaz (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=529754) (24 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/529754.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=AmoreJaz)) 207. 1x (Jr. Member) d34thkn3ll (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1095310) (1 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/1095310.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=d34thkn3ll)) 208. 1x (Full Member) Michail9090 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=249867) (0 Merit earned (history (http://loyce.club/Merit/history/249867.html))) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Michail9090)) 209. 1x (Full Member) thorRJ (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1116638) (BPIP (https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=thorRJ)) Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: Welsh on October 15, 2019, 05:45:38 AM Why? I would think it would be better to trash their posts too. Just my view, but it would make the thread more empty which is kind of the point in preventing spam. There's various different reasons, but one of the reasons could be compromised accounts which requires admin intervention. From a reporting point of view you wouldn't know this, though. At least in my opinion. Do you also believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the tooth fairy? I know for a fact that the tooth fairy doesn't exist. I mean it depends if the user has any morals or not. From my stand point of view if someone is going to be causing spam on a forum that they're advertising on then that's a red flag. I don't see the best projects doing it that's the point. Litecoin, Grin, and etheruem never had to resort to these bumping services. Seriously, people are going to try every trick in the book to get their thread bumped and due to the amount of crap in those boards they try everything they can think of to move their posts up. Otherwise even the best project is going to get buried. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: nutildah on October 16, 2019, 04:18:18 PM The same thing is happening in Credits ANN topic. It's actually a self-moderated topic but, I don't think the OP doesn't view it as a spam. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3375263.2340 Its scammers scamming scammers. This particular bumping service has been around for over a year. They have over a hundred accounts. I've (along with JollyGood and MaoChao) tagged about 40 of them for promoting scams. They have failed to inform their clientele that their threads are no longer being bumped to the top of the Alt ANN section as they used to. I've linked them to a merit salesman and am in the middle of an extensive investigation of them... Funny how they can continue to find clients that aren't deterred by the (now orange ::) ) negative trust mark, and who don't think to check if their thread is actually being bumped. The projects that hire them are basically getting ripped off, but they themselves are also likely also scammers, so I don't feel bad for them. When I saw the ann thread of lohncontrol.com (http://lohncontrol.com), one of my words was OMG! Hundreds of newbie accounts are bumping their ann thread everyday. It is like one liner post's flood! Looks like ann bumpers paradise in this place. ... There are about 500-600 accounts involved in this bumping flood.It is not an easy task to give post history of all accounts. This looks like the work of Vitor Services (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5160199.0) as they write in the exact same style, but I haven't looked into it to confirm yet. Same deal: scammers scamming scammers. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: ScamViruS on October 16, 2019, 07:23:13 PM Its scammers scamming scammers. This particular bumping service has been around for over a year. They have over a hundred accounts. I've (along with JollyGood and MaoChao) tagged about 40 of them for promoting scams. They have failed to inform their clientele that their threads are no longer being bumped to the top of the Alt ANN section as they used to. The projects that use the bumping service. I think they should give the tag. Because they violate the rules of the forum.They bumping their Ann for showing fake community, to investors. Which is like a scam.Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: LoyceV on October 16, 2019, 07:28:08 PM I think they should give the tag. Because they violate the rules of the forum. Anything that's covered by forum rules, should be handled by Mods.Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: TalkStar on October 16, 2019, 08:01:05 PM The projects that use the bumping service. I think they should give the tag. Because they violate the rules of the forum.They bumping their Ann for showing fake community, to investors. Which is like a scam. To get faster actions on this kinda situation you should use the button of "Report to moderator" and forum mods will take immediate actions against them. Specially on this kinda spamming where hunderds of accounts are connected red tag isn't going to bring best results and its time consuming too. This spammers don't care about red tag and most of them even don't know yet why his profile trust area painted with red colours. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: ScamViruS on October 17, 2019, 05:58:16 PM I think they should give the tag. Because they violate the rules of the forum. Anything that's covered by forum rules, should be handled by Mods.I think. If someone tries to continue fake conversation with hundreds of newbie accounts on an Ann thread. Then the moderator should lock the thread. This is just my opinion. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: hosseinimr93 on October 17, 2019, 06:17:59 PM I think they should give the tag. Because they violate the rules of the forum. Anything that's covered by forum rules, should be handled by Mods.I think. If someone tries to continue fake conversation with hundreds of newbie accounts on an Ann thread. Then the moderator should lock the thread. This is just my opinion. A few days ago a same thing was happening to another ANN thread. Iasenko asked the moderators to lock the topic. Moderators were more strict than expected. They deleted that ANN thread. Here is the topic made by iasenko. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5189961.0 As there are still many newbies making useless posts on the ANN thread you mentioned, might be a good idea to delete that or at least lock that. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: ScamViruS on October 21, 2019, 09:17:50 AM Even after I opened this thread, surprisingly they continue to fake the conversation with their newbies account, just like before. I think this action will not stop until the right action is taken against them. Unless the thread lock, thread delete, action is taken,they will do the same things.
Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: UserU on October 21, 2019, 09:26:23 AM Even after I opened this thread, surprisingly they continue to fake the conversation with their newbies account, just like before. I think this action will not stop until the right action is taken against them. Unless the thread lock, thread delete, action is taken,they will do the same things. Well, time to get those mods busy 8) Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: hosseinimr93 on October 21, 2019, 09:34:07 AM Even after I opened this thread, surprisingly they continue to fake the conversation with their newbies account, just like before. I think this action will not stop until the right action is taken against them. Unless the thread lock, thread delete, action is taken,they will do the same things. Do not expect them to come here and read your post. I am sure they have never visited "Meta" board. They don't even know how the new bumping system works. I guess they don't even realize that some of their posts are reported and deleted. They know nothing about the forum. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: Welsh on October 21, 2019, 11:15:27 AM I've been keeping an eye on the thread for a while, and despite having their posts deleted, and their accounts banned they continued to post so they've ended up in the trashcan.
I'm seeing this more, and more outside of the altcoin section, and mainly within the gambling sections. Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: BonfireBob on October 21, 2019, 11:29:27 AM lol, what do you do with the accounts laters? sell them, or what? what is the purpose to shill answers on one topic?
Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: DaveF on October 21, 2019, 11:34:31 AM Even after I opened this thread, surprisingly they continue to fake the conversation with their newbies account, just like before. I think this action will not stop until the right action is taken against them. Unless the thread lock, thread delete, action is taken,they will do the same things. I would think that removing the posts and accounts responsible would be enough. If you do that then the people who are paying for the service can go back to the people doing it and say "where are the posts?" This way after dealing with many clients who don't think they got what they paid for it might get better. You can't lock / remove the thread because it would lead to people hiring these scammers to bomb threads that they don't like to get them taken down. -Dave Title: Re: Fake conversation by hundred plus newbie accounts. Post by: ScamViruS on October 21, 2019, 12:50:49 PM Thread has been deleted. Many thanks to moderator. Need everyones contributions to keep the forum spam free. It is the responsibility of all members to Stopping them for doing bad things. :)
Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 07:12:14 AM Greetings to all !
I'm Val, Art director at Lohncontrol and I think we owe you some explanations regarding this situation: At the time of launching the project I've explained on the forum in the first 20-30 posts about what Lohncontrol is, how it works and what our objective is. For transparency, we also explained in this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5156593.0 on a different section, and also, in romanian section, because we are a predominant romanian team: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5152788.0 Then, in order to focus on the actual development of the project, we hired an agency with some people specialized in communication to maintain dialogue with the public. We regret the incident created and we assume the failure of correct communication with our supporters, but as you can see on our site and on icobench.com, Lohncontrol is appreciated by connoisseurs because we have managed to coagulate a strong team, with many specializations and international business experience For the moment we are in full process of discussions in order to develop partnership with many valuable projects capable of providing complementary services to our wide platform and helping the project reach to its target. We will try in the future to pay more attention to both public expectations and outsourcing of certain services. Thanks for your support. p.s. we were also faced with a clone problem (see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5173500.0 ) so, we were pretty busy regarding this issue. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: LoyceV on October 23, 2019, 07:17:36 AM we hired an agency with some people specialized in communication to maintain dialogue with the public. Quoted for reference. So you admit to hiring bump spammers. For your own financial gain, you pay people to spam this forum. Let me put it nicely: not cool!Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 07:41:35 AM we hired an agency with some people specialized in communication to maintain dialogue with the public. Quoted for reference. So you admit to hiring bump spammers. For your own financial gain, you pay people to spam this forum. Let me put it nicely: not cool!We haven't hired anyone to spam, but to maintain the social area of the project. If those employees made mistakes and put a bad light on our project, we will analyze the collaboration with them. First of all, we also need a point of view from them, because for our team, we've just discovered the incident. Anyway, it is not so unusual for a project to employ specialized agencies. The whole purpose for communication and marketing agencies is to offer services to some projects. Our only regret is that we have not closely followed their activity. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: LoyceV on October 23, 2019, 08:48:13 AM We haven't hired anyone to spam, but to maintain the social area of the project. Can you share what "package" you bought, and how much you were charged for it?Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 10:37:10 AM No I can't.This attitude would be very unfair and unproductive at this point. First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily.
But still, because we are in this point of discussion, I would like to overcome this unpleasant moment, and I am offering to answer to any questions about the project, as long as someone is interested in something other than this questionable thread. Our project can be viewed on both lohncontrol.com and https://icobench.com/ico/lohn and it's extremely explicit and transparent. It is a real business project in which the blockchain has the role to secure the relationship between the parties involved in the ecosystem of the business services platform. We are also available on telegram: https://t.me/lohncontrol_announcements/ Thanks for understanding Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: stompix on October 23, 2019, 11:03:14 AM First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. Let me explain you as simple as possible! You PAID a company to BUMP (SPAM) your topic without reading the RULES of the forum. Simple enough? No I can't.This attitude would be very unfair and unproductive at this point. Quite the opposite, your attitude is unproductive. You came here talking about communication and marketing and you refuse to read and understand what the problem with your so-called project is. Also, as all the rules breakers are doing in meta, you're starting to dig your hole deeper and deeper. Just checked 3 of your team members, quite interesting at least...I have a feeling we're going to see each other again in the reputation section. ;D Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: Bttzed03 on October 23, 2019, 11:37:17 AM No I can't. Why not? Do you have a non-disclosure agreement?~ First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. Explanation from whom? The agency you hired to maintain dialogue with the public (your words)? Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 11:56:53 AM No I can't. Why not? Do you have a non-disclosure agreement?~ First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. Explanation from whom? The agency you hired to maintain dialogue with the public (your words)? Exactly. It's only fair play to first get a point of view from them (the agency) because they were hired to outsource the communication services. On the other hand, both the project and the team are opened to any verification because everything is transparent. It is unfortunate that although I have expressed my willingness to answer to any question regarding the project, my efforts are considered hostile. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: TheBeardedBaby on October 23, 2019, 12:52:39 PM No I can't. Why not? Do you have a non-disclosure agreement?~ First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. Explanation from whom? The agency you hired to maintain dialogue with the public (your words)? Exactly. It's only fair play to first get a point of view from them (the agency) because they were hired to outsource the communication services. On the other hand, both the project and the team are opened to any verification because everything is transparent. It is unfortunate that although I have expressed my willingness to answer to any question regarding the project, my efforts are considered hostile. You have to understand that the forum, as a platform for announcing new projects, has been abused a lot in the past, and now the community together with the management is taking care of those abusers. Fake promoters charging you for spamming and dragging you project to the bottom is not uncommon. You are not the only one (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4720640.msg52826535#msg52826535) who crossed the line. You don't have many options here, better collaborate as much as you can, expose those spammers to the public and hope for better outcome. Don't look for advertisers on fiverr, there is already a service section (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=52.0) on the forum where you can find reputable members, but I guess it's already too late. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: The Cryptovator on October 23, 2019, 01:06:41 PM Then, in order to focus on the actual development of the project, we hired an agency with some people specialized in communication to maintain dialogue with the public. Can I get their original bitcointalk I'd or contact details. Perhaps it would help me ;).It's quite clear you have hired some person to make fake conversation on your thread. And it's not allowed by forum and community. From forum side you already punished. Hope community will punished soon.... First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. What explanation are you finding? Perhaps moderators would ban your account due to use paid bumping services. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: alanst on October 23, 2019, 02:20:32 PM No I can't. Why not? Do you have a non-disclosure agreement?~ First, we need to find an explanation for this incident primarily. Explanation from whom? The agency you hired to maintain dialogue with the public (your words)? Exactly. It's only fair play to first get a point of view from them (the agency) because they were hired to outsource the communication services. On the other hand, both the project and the team are opened to any verification because everything is transparent. It is unfortunate that although I have expressed my willingness to answer to any question regarding the project, my efforts are considered hostile. Yeah, right! Let's not play innocent...How about this scenario: just by revealing their name/package details, everyone would realize that it's an obvious bumping service so actually saying it would make you the bad guy for knowing exactly what you paid for. Seems a bit more accurate, doesn't it? Even though one right doesn't erase a wrong, actually helping us clean the forum of their spam would be a first step to redemption! Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 05:31:13 PM It is obvious that we were a little naive and this was a big mistake, the agency in charge regarding communication assumed it and we apologize to the community from this forum for the incident created.
The thread has been deleted and we consider this legitimate from the moderator. We really wish things to stop here because there are some members who are very vocal and consider our mistake unforgettable. But let me ask you: by removing us from this forum, suddenly all the spam situations will be solved? We are open to make things right and to show that the incident was an unfortunate and isolated event from our party. Regarding the disclosure of the agency name, we inform you that we can't do this because we've had and still have a good collaboration relationship. They have assured us that such an incident will not happen again; this mistake was made by some excessive zeal motivated employees. Once again, we apologize to the community from this forum. Lohncontrol Team Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: Welsh on October 23, 2019, 05:39:50 PM You haven't been banned, but your thread was trashed because of the fake conversations getting out of hand. Especially, because a lot of those accounts were getting banned, and a lot of replies were deleted. However, your agency or whatever continued to post fake conversations within the thread. Therefore, the thread has been trashed. You haven't been banned yet which means you're free to open your thread up again. However, if the same sort of pattern ensures its much more likely that the issue will be dealt with more severely.
Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: lohncontrol on October 23, 2019, 06:07:43 PM You haven't been banned, but your thread was trashed because of the fake conversations getting out of hand. Especially, because a lot of those accounts were getting banned, and a lot of replies were deleted. However, your agency or whatever continued to post fake conversations within the thread. Therefore, the thread has been trashed. You haven't been banned yet which means you're free to open your thread up again. However, if the same sort of pattern ensures its much more likely that the issue will be dealt with more severely. This is the correct approach. We've made a mistake and we take the blame by posting our understanding to respect the rules of the community because it is normal to be so. We've fell into a trap without our will but a friendly attitude can help us all to progress and find a way for dialogue. Thank you Welsh for your willingness to understand that the incident is the result of an assumed mistake for which we have already been punished. We hope we can make it up to the community by explaining more transparent and honest what this project is all about. Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: Rizzrack on October 24, 2019, 02:21:15 AM We've made a mistake and we take the blame by posting our understanding to respect the rules of the community because it is normal to be so. Sorry but from your response I don't feel like you fully grasp what actually happened here...We've fell into a trap without our will ... So you paid this agency a monthly fee (I would estimate around $300-$400 per month) "to maintain dialogue with the public". Now here is the twist: That guy you talked to has a huge bump farm and 90% of the conversation (if not more) was done BY HIS OWN ACCOUNTS. "The agency" has a truckload of accounts and posts with them to CREATE THE ILLUSION of conversation, but it's actually a monologue. Not only that you broke the forum rules but you also got ripped off. And that will remain true regardless of any "excessive zeal motivated employees". (which is a load of BS) ... we've had and still have a good collaboration relationship. They have assured us that such an incident will not happen again... If you will continue working with agencies that have this practice there will be consequences ! First of all we will know for sure what kind of business you are trying to run there and secondly the new thread would have the same fate as the first one but with a ban as a bonus (depending on the mods).Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: LoyceV on October 24, 2019, 08:16:31 AM So you paid this agency a monthly fee (I would estimate around $300-$400 per month) "to maintain dialogue with the public". I've seen weekly quotes from bumping services around $1000. That was at the peak of the ICO bubble, but it's big business.Title: Re: [Thanks moderators for delete spam thread]Fake conversation. Post by: UserU on October 24, 2019, 10:32:39 AM I've seen weekly quotes from bumping services around $1000. That was at the peak of the ICO bubble, but it's big business. Damn, that's way more than a standard signature space from some Legendary member. |
