~snip~
Interesting: this breaks the link between old and new username as I described here. I hope that you’ve only done this to test the forum, kind of like a Meta task because mic is DT1 & a lives very comfortably in real life. There could quite easily be opportunities to abuse the account ‘micgoossens’ for personal gain. Am I the only one who thought it's a good thing to know changing your username means you can lose your old name? That's especially imporant for Donators who temporarily change their name to something else! Apologies if I’ve offended you, it wasn’t my intention. Please stop offending me by apologizing for offending people  |
|
|
|
Putting faith in anonymous 3rd parties here is still a dangerous precedent to set. Agreed! That's why I asked Vod and Lutpin to verify the evidence, and vouch for it's authenticity. So in this case, if you trust the judgement of Vod, Lutpin and me, you can assume the evidence is real. Apart from that, and back to a more generic case: when I myself am convinced someone is guilty, I can leave them negative feedback. I don't need to present evidence for that, although I'll do it whenever possible. On Mobile on the other hand I'm usually too lazy to create a reference link, but the fact that all 6 users with a Scammer tag got nuked is good enough for me. |
|
|
|
I'll share my 2 sats here: It depends  Anyone has the freedom to accuse anyone. It's up to others whether or not they value their opinion. See this topic for example: I made an accusation of which I had seen conclusive proof, but I didn't share it for privacy reasons. Many people tagged the account. I had the proof verified by 2 other users, but still, most of the users who tagged the account didn't get to see it. However, if a random newbie would make the same accusation, he would need evidence. In the above case the random newbie gave me the evidence, after which I could testify it's legit. People who trust my judgement could therefore trust the claim from the Newbie without seeing the evidence by themselves. |
|
|
|
lnbc100u1p0pv5y5pp5uagzm5tfdgnuu55788pxfhncy736gc2hr3lxrlq8fkf0d6m0se3sdp2gajhgarfdenjqcfqf3hkzm3qveex7mfqf3hhjcm92ccqzpgxqyz5vq32my89k9yexrkpe3u0s5wagk48pkt6gsnme5a8cwrwrfjrft0779rjv88yt5mg3fwcq5e9vc0pgn64gef38mkffl5pwr99gjx2kwyvcq2pgy9r
Funded! With 32 satoshi fee. Sorry for the delay, it was night here. |
|
|
|
I hope that the mods here take some action to restore us back to original state I don't think Mods can remove Flags, but Admin has done it once before: 2020-01-09 Thu 03.18hsource: loyce.club818. This Flag has been removed by the Bitcointalk forum administration 819. This Flag has been removed by the Bitcointalk forum administration 820. This Flag has been removed by the Bitcointalk forum administration 831. This Flag has been removed by the Bitcointalk forum administration 832. This Flag has been removed by the Bitcointalk forum administration I would like to see inactive Flags with less bright colors. Once you click the "inactive Flags" link, they look exactly the same as active Flags, unless you read the details. My first impression is always seeing a big bright Flag. |
|
|
|
Should put a lifetime limit on how many merit any user can receive from another also. 50 is probably a good number for that.
That would mean I can no longer send Merit to some of the best posts I read, including theymos' posts. |
|
|
|
Thanks again  I won't hold it against you that you're 7 seconds late, it's still impressive  |
|
|
|
"What if we can observe data on DT 1/2 members over months and see how long as well as how consistent they maintain their positions as DT1/2 members. I know with the algorithm to automatically include and exclude DT members each month from theymos, it seems to be difficult that someone can maintain DT member positions for many months. theymos updates his trust list each month so if you can, please dump that data monthly. I more or less kept track of this since May 2019 in Complete overview of users on DT1 and DT2 and their ratings. For DT1, I'm still planning to make my dtview-viewer, but I ran into some dificulties and never got to finish it. This should not be difficult to implement. It's doable indeed, but I don't really want to add more "categories" to my data collecting. And I can't think of a use for a list of usernames and ranks. Piggy made something like it in Open scraped data of all the users - SQL Lite DB - 2.481.270 users, but it's not being updated. |
|
|
|
I am against this, even though it's sometimes abused: don't change it! Even if it's lowered, abusers can still abuse it, but legit uses will be more difficult. I am a merit source, but I don't find so difficult to spend my smerits. I prefer to give 3-4 per good (or above average) post than to give 50 in a single transaction. It becomes a lot more work when your source keeps growing!I can barely keep up with emptying my source as it gets replenished, and "my own" stash of sMerit has grown >600 again. Despite this, I am currently the "Most generous recent merit sender". There's also this: It's best if sources try to exhaust their source allocations, even if it means giving posts higher amounts than is typical. If you have 150 source merit and you only see 3 merit-worthy posts in a month, then I'd rather you over-give each of them 50 merit than let the merit expire. That way there are more people capable of sending merit, and the "merit economy" is less top-down. I wouldn't worry too much about posts that receive 50 Merit. If an abuser is buying them, it'll be terribly expensive to reach Legendary. And if it's a one-time thing, he won't reach a high rank from it. |
|
|
|
While I was opposing BSV flags, I saw many other inactive flags which are probably wrong, which occurred in my absence. I say “probably wrong” because they are against people I’d be more or less inclined to trust, and/or were opposed by people I trust. I wouldn't try to vote on all possible Flags. There's far too many of them, and ideally many different users should all check a few Flags once in a while to make voting more distributed. I observe this to underscore what psycodad said, “I take my responsibility and right of supporting or opposing flags quite serious”. In my Trust Flag viewer, I highlight the easy ones to Oppose: duplicate Flags and Flags without valid Reference link |
|
|
|
Thanks is there a tool i can use to recover ? as i must have missed a few characters off or could someone help me via private message as i do not want to disclose it on here !! Just another warning: you shouldn't disclose your private key through PM either! You could make an exception if you really trust the person and your balance isn't high, but as always: stay vigilant. |
|
|
|
From your reply, it seems you only update usernames for new registered users, don't you? Correct. There's no point in continuously scraping 2.7 million usernames to find at most a few name changes per month. |
|
|
|
This is how you check a user's original username: click MY MESSAGES > New Message > Find Members > Enter current username > Search > Click the username under Results. Then, check the field after "To:" on the new message you're sending. |
|
|
|
1172 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1173 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1174 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1175 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1176 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1177 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1178 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1179 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1180 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1181 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1182 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1183 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1184 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah[/size]. 1185 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1186 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1187 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1188 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1189 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1190 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1191 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1192 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1193 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1194 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01195 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01196 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01197 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1198 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1199 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius. 1201 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1202 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1203 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1204 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1205 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1206 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by suchmoon, psycodad, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. |
|
|
|
He just left 62 frivolous flags, most people got 3. They are flag #s 1137 - 1199. I opposed all of them. I'll post a list after finishing my Flag viewer's update. See: So here's a complete list of all Flags created by Bitcoin SV: 2020-01-08 Wed 12.08hsource: loyce.club1085 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by Vod, gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, TMAN, TheUltraElite, psycodad, JollyGood, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, mosprognoz, Coolcryptovator, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1086 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, TheUltraElite, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, mosprognoz, Timelord2067, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1087 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, stompix, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1088 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, stompix, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1089 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1090 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1091 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1092 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1093 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1104 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1105 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1106 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1132 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1133 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1134 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by TMAN, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1137 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1138 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1139 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1140 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1141 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1142 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1143 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1144 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1145 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1146 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1147 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1148 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1149 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1150 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1151 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 295 and 1151 are duplicates. 1152 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1153 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1154 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1155 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1156 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1157 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1158 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1159 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1160 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1161 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1162 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1163 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1164 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1165 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1166 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 365 and 1166 are duplicates. 1167 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1168 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1169 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 108 and 1169 are duplicates. 1170 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1171 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. |
|
|
|
1172 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1173 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1174 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1175 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged boltalka Banned! (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1176 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1177 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1178 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged shinohai (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1179 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1180 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1181 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged dragonvslinux (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1182 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1183 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1184 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged blurryeyed (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah[/size]. 1185 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1186 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1187 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Timelord2067 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1188 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1189 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1190 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged IconFirm (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1191 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1192 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1193 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged MagicByt3 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1194 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01195 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01196 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nullius (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** nullius commented: Thank you, BSV, for showing how scared you are to have your scam exposed. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5215743.01197 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1198 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1199 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DooMAD (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, nullius. 1201 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1202 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1203 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JollyGood (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1204 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1205 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nullius, SockyMcSockFace[/size]. 1206 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged SockyMcSockFace (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by suchmoon, psycodad, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. Several of those Flags have added comments. I'll manually add them to the above post (which had to be split in 2 because of the 64kB character limit). |
|
|
|
My post was deleted too, I guess he doesn't like reality: What's wrong with being offended? Grow a thicker skin, this is the internet! I would consider creating 3 of the same Flags abuse, and adding ";support" to the link instead of giving people the freedom to choose what they want doesn't help your case. So here's a complete list of all Flags created by Bitcoin SV: 2020-01-08 Wed 12.08hsource: loyce.club1085 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by Vod, gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, TMAN, TheUltraElite, psycodad, JollyGood, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, mosprognoz, Coolcryptovator, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1086 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, TheUltraElite, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, mosprognoz, Timelord2067, IconFirm, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1087 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, stompix, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1088 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mosprognoz (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, stompix, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1089 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1090 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Lauda (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, Patatas, examplens, nutildah, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1091 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1092 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1093 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged yogg (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by gmaxwell, Foxpup, suchmoon, LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, examplens, nutildah, psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1104 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1105 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1106 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged suchmoon (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by LFC_Bitcoin, LoyceV, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, SockyMcSockFace. 1132 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1133 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by psycodad, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1134 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged nutildah (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by TMAN, teeGUMES, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, DireWolfM14, morvillz7z, JSRAW, dragonvslinux, SockyMcSockFace. 1137 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1138 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1139 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged TMAN (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, nullius, SockyMcSockFace. 1140 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1141 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1142 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged marlboroza (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1143 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1144 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1145 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Coolcryptovator (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, TMAN, psycodad, JollyGood, o_e_l_e_o, Coolcryptovator, SockyMcSockFace. 1146 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1147 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1148 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LFC_Bitcoin (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1149 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1150 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1151 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged mindrust (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 295 and 1151 are duplicates. 1152 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1153 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1154 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged DireWolfM14 (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, o_e_l_e_o, SockyMcSockFace. 1155 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1156 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1157 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged franckuestein (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1158 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1159 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1160 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Hueristic (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, SockyMcSockFace. 1161 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1162 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1163 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged JSRAW (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1164 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1165 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1166 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged Last of the V8s (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 365 and 1166 are duplicates. 1167 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1168 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1169 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged gembitz (type 1, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. *** This is an automated comment: Flags 108 and 1169 are duplicates. 1170 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 3, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. 1171 Insufficient support. Bitcoin SV flagged LBX (type 2, see why). Supported by Bitcoin SV. Opposed by nutildah, JSRAW, SockyMcSockFace. |
|
|
|
But this time, it is for ranks Do you mean for only DT1 and DT2 users, or for all users? The former is easy to do, the latter will have outdated information because 2.7 million profiles aren't instantly updated on BPIP. |
|
|
|
~snip~ So now I'll have a weekly task updating usernames for my Trust list viewer: theymos publishes a weekly dump of usernames, and I have no way to automate searching for the userID that goes with the names. I can see at least 9 (*) more cases over the last year, but Id say it’s better not to publish them, lest they want it to remain a private matter (although I’m pretty sure they get noticed by those that interact with them). You can always check the original username by searching for the user from the MY MESSAGES "Find Members" link. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
