'GermanGiant' is maintaining his run of posting in forums which do not display his negative trust rating.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=311162;sa=showPosts

If you haven't checked it out yet, please review my suggestion here for dealing with this obvious gaming of the trust system by known scammers: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1438012.msg14548472#msg14548472

^^^ PSA: Do not click on the previous user's banner. 'GermanGiant' is a shill for, or even the operator of, a known 'cloud mining' ponzi fraud. He chooses to post in forums which do not display his trust rating because it shows him to be untrustworthy and it has dramatically impacted his scam's ability to rope in new victims.

Many of you are already familiar with the, frankly appalling, history of Brock Pierce, the current Chairman of the Bitcoin Foundation.

But it has been a while since the initial outrage at his appointment to the board and, while history has shown us that he and his paedophile chums prefer the tactic of avoiding responsibility for their actions and just hoping the furore will burn itself out, I think it is time we revisit the known facts which explain why Bitcoin, The Bitcoin Foundation and this industry in general, needs to distance itself from him as fast and as far as it can.

"An Open Secret FULL DOCUMENTARY"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0V_j8G3cNQ&app=desktop

This documentary gives an in-depth look at child sexual abuse in Hollywood. Brock Pierce is first mentioned at mark 26:06 and what follows is a disturbing insight into how he and his associates conducted their business and social lives. He is referenced throughout the documentary, including in legal deposition citing how he and his powerful industry friends were accused of grooming, drugging, using and abusing young boys. Many of these men are convicted sex offenders. Many of them, even after their high-profile convictions, continue to work in Hollywood with children. So it proves that if an industry is willing to ignore and normalise convicted sexual predators operating unopposed, because of the allure of money and power, cryptocurrency, which *is* money and power, needs to decide if it, too, wants to simply ignore the elephant in the room which is Brock Pierce's public and proven past.

I urge all of you who may not yet be aware of the history of the man who is the public and industry face of bitcoin to watch this documentary and gain insight into who Brock Pierce is and how he and his associates stand accused of destroying the lives of young boys. He is the Chairman of the Bitcoin Foundation and as much as some might claim them to be irrelevant, mainstream media and commerce sees them as the first point of contact when wanting to speak to 'someone from bitcoin'.

At the end of the documentary a 'rogues gallery' sequence leads to this image:


Watch the documentary and then tell me if you still feel his position as Chairman of The Bitcoin Foundation is irrelevant to the public and commercial perception of Bitcoin.

Make.Some.Noise.

LMAO, now why did I know you'd take this stance QS? 'Obviously' a bad idea?

How do you figure that the prevention of, say, the example I have given in the OP, where a known shill for a known fraudulent 'cloud mining' scam is gaming the system and flaunting his promotional signature banner, a bad idea? How is the suggestion to have ratings displayed for all forums or at least signatures restricted, an 'obviously' bad idea?

These things are meaningless. You can register a company online for a few quid, get SSL for a few quid more and simply not host malware on your scammy-ass website. How does that serve to prove you are not a ponzi fraud?

There is little point attending what will simply be a promotional booth for their ponzi scheme.

No, I don't mean everywhere, I mean in forums that do not show the trust rating of a user alongside their post.

Example:

This scumbag shill for the ponzi 'cloud mining' fraud cloudmining.website has taken to regularly posting in forums where his negative rating is not displayed, hoping instead to offer some 'helpful' advice and flaunt the gigantic banner promoting his scam in his signature space.

He and his ilk are having to resort more and more to this tactic because they are finding it harder to rope in new suckers to their criminally fraudulent scams. Seeing as they are gaming the trust rating system by avoiding those forums where it is displayed, I think it would make good sense to at least prevent their signature from being included in their post if they are rated as untrustworthy.

Thoughts?

OP, ignore this user's advice he is a shill for the 'cloud minining' ponzi fraud he advertises in his signature. Clearly just wanting to rope in new suckers to his scam.

The vast majority of 'cloud mining' operations are scams and those that aren't are likely to not be profitable in the months it would take to earn back what you pay to them. They should be avoided at all cost.

Unfortunately there are many people lacking in morality, like GermanGiant, who will happily con you into sending your money somewhere you will not see it return. My advice to you is to stop seeing it as 1.5BTC and think of it as being simply the equivalent amount in your local fiat currency. Whatever you would spend/invest in fiat is likely to be a better guide for you than the recommendations of anonymous internet forum users who might have a motive to be less than honest with you.

 

Oh lookie, GermanGiant is back today and busy trying to rope in new suckers:


I especially love how he has emphasised with bold how the OP of the thread concerned could benefit by making sure not to withdraw from his cloud mining ponzi fraud.

OP, ignore this user's advice he is a shill for the 'cloud minining' ponzi fraud he advertises in his signature. Clearly just wanting to rope in new suckers to his scam.

Actually to claim that 100% of the 'games' in IBG are scams is false. I'd hazard a guess that 99.9% are.

It would be an unreasonable burden on forum moderation to expect staff to ban those they believed were scams because, as we know from the assholes who routinely post these threads, they don't give up on their scamming dreams easily. The simplest solution appears to be the system we have now, they end up in IBG and the community tags them as scams unless and until they can present a reasonable case as being otherwise.

I do think it would be worthwhile considering banning anybody under full member or even senior member level from opening new threads in there though. But I guess they'd just open a thread in another forum under a newbie account and just make the mods move it there instead, so that's not going to do much unless that could be avoided.

Meh. He could claim he didn't know it was a ponzi when he deposited towards the end of last year. Fine line though, if posts start leaning towards suggesting it isn't the ponzi fraud that it is.

Umm, Joshie, a 'mining address' is supposed to show newly minted coins from the blocks you are mining. Anyone managed to find any in that address?

That's odd. The 'Basic Lease Information' page shows a monthly rent in figures of $46,000.00 but the contract states, in words, "Forty Six Hundred Dollars" per month.