I saw a thread in which OgN was apparently doxed but as of when I saw it, the dox was removed. The thread in question appears to now have been removed. Is this about the same thread?

It appears Vod claims OgN doesn’t pay appropriate taxes based upon the fact that he calls various payments to him “donations” which is obviously hogwash. The “donation” description is a marketing tool (a counterproductive one IMO, but how OgN markets his services is up to OgN). The “donation” description in relation to nastyfans is probably more accurate, however this is a very complex issue that would likely be the subject of litigation if the US government were to ever get involved (I don’t think they will based on the amounts involved, and based on the fact set).

As I mentioned previously in another thread, Vod has a history of using doxes as a weapon against people he doesn’t like. He also doesn’t do any real research to confirm the accuracy of the doxes he receives and as such he likely posts doxes of random people who have never interacted with Vod in the past.

As an example, Vod posted what he thought was my dox years ago in an effort to try to get me to leave the forum because I was critical of him. He initially posted what he believed to be my first name in an effort to intimidate me, which I didn’t pick up on because it was wrong. After he posted what he believed to be my full dox, including what he believed to be my address, multiple reputable people who have felt with me posted his information was incorrect (and no one publicly said his information was correct). After being told he had bad information, he contacted who he believed to be my employer in an effort to get me fired, except it was also wrong. His source was an account with multiple recent trust ratings indicating the account was recently sold. In other words, Vod received his information from an anonymous source, was refuted by multiple reputable people, did zero due diligence, and proceeded to try to get the person fired on the small chance it was me, al because I was critical of Vod.


If Vod received merit on a post in which OgN was doxed, this is an example of a flaw in the merit system.

Did you not literally just repay a loan from zazarb 3 minutes before you asked for a new loan?

Patrollers (at one point, the majority of mods were patrollers -- moderators of newbies) can ban Brand New and Newbie accounts.

killyou72 is probably a good person to test the bolded part:
I am not sure if he would intentionally scam TF, but he does have a history of screwing around a lot.

Assuming Sanders won the primaries, he would have lost the presidency by a landslide -- he is much too far to the left to be reasonably electable. This is also true for the majority of candidates running in 2020, their policies are way outside of the mainstream, and will only win the very solid left states.

The unfair 2016 primaries caused many Sanders supporters to either stay home or support Trump out of spite in 2016. Had the primaries been fair and Clinton won the primary fairly, her chances in the general election would have been much better. 

Actually no.

You are essentially extorting other forum members to scare them out of not being critical of you out of fear you will make frivolous reports of crimes to start an investigation by the SEC (which is very expensive on the part of the person being investigated, even if there is no wrongdoing).   

The trust exclusions "feature" was introduced not long after you were removed from DT2. I strongly suspect that theymos got some pushback when he was asking those on DT1 who had you on their trust lists to remove you from DT.

There is no reason to relitigate the underlying reasons, however theymos did not want you on DT. If there is someone who theymos does not want on DT, theymos should try to persuade the DT1 sponsor to remove that person, listen to any feedback he gets in response, and at the end of the day if the person is still on DT, theymos should be willing to remove the sponsor from DT1 if he still believes the person should not be on DT.

The implementation of trust exclusions allowed a DT1 sponsor to include a person on their trust list who should not be in DT without any real consequences. After Blazed was added to DT1, he added multiple inappropriate people to his trust list, and instead of forcing (or even attempting to) Blazed to address the issue, other DT1 sponsors ended up excluding multiple people Blazed had added to his trust list, some were excluded from DT, others were not. This absolved both Blazed and theymos from taking any kind of responsibility.

With the introduction of the "new" DT system, implemented this January, DT has become more of a popularity contest with those who are unpopular receiving exclusions, and those who say the right things receiving a bunch of unwarranted trust and trust inclusions.

This is why it is only safe to use biometrics as an access medium when using a device that can protect against these types of attacks.

A website relying on third party devices to transmit fingerprint data is not going to work. However verifying fingerprint information locally will be much more secure.

As an FYI, it is not trivial to replicate a fingerprint so that it reasonably appears the same on a fingerprint scanner. What is much easier is transmitting the data from a fingerprint scanner showing the fingerprint is the same.

When you consent to a background check at most employers, you will have your fingerprints taken and transmitted to the FBI to cross reference against arrest records.

Also you leave your fingerprints ~everywhere, and the government could trivially get them by just following you around a little bit.

If this is true, he should have known better.

He also would have had the opportunity to review his old posts and delete any that were plagiarized.

Please read the OP. Two posts are required to be considered.

The test is if someone will be willing to scam a scammer and if anyone is willing to do anything about it.

I am not sure if anyone would scam TF, but I strongly suspect that most of the most active “scam busters” will do nothing if TF doesn’t get repaid.

From the looks of it, you need to give up control of your coins for a short period, but will essentially automatically withdraw your coins as soon as your trade executes.

It is not possible to trade one coin for another in a 100% trust less way in which neither party needs to trust the other.

It doesn’t look like this company even has very much capital because they are outsourcing their trading to third parties. Eg it appears that you are actually sending money to a third party who will trade on your behalf on an exchange and will withdraw from the exchange on your behalf. 

You are assuming I haven't reported you.

You have a strange obsession of trying to determine if you are being investigated by law enforcement for this.

It is best if the subject of an investigation not know they are under investigation by law enforcement so to prevent them from acting differently while they are being investigated, and to prevent them from specifically wanting to destroy evidence because they are under investigation.

plagiarism
I had never heard of him before today (that I can remember), but I don't think any amount of contribution is an excuse to cause harm without any kind of punishment.  

I don't see any reason why he would be ineligible for DT1 if he was unbanned from the forum.

Your question is loaded, and is an attempt to stroke your ego.

I don't think anyone knows you as that. You are known to hand out ratings against many new users who engage in transparent scammy behavior. If memory serves me correctly, you used to accept "anon" reports of scams, but had to stop because you were unable to sufficiently judge the evidence on its own, and received too many inaccurate reports that resulted in you handing out bad ratings.

Obviously fraud should be reported, as such *suspected* fraud, however with regards to the later, there needs to be a reasonable basis to forum the suspicion that extends beyond the preponderance of the evidence standard, not the I don't like the person standard, or the this person is criticizing me standard.

The fact that you were afraid to speak out against lauda and aTriz shows you care more about your stats and less about actually warning others about wrongdoing.

The issue is a bigger in regards to DT voting. A banned user will currently have their votes counted indefinitely, even though they are prevented from otherwise participating in the forum.

There are two recently banned users who each have close to two of the "250 merit" votes (it is not unreasonable to expect they will each receive a total of 500 merit in the future) for DT voting. 

Vod has a long history of trying to get people fired when he does not like them. He also doxes people for similar reasons.

I would not put it past him to try to get someone arrested or audited for similar reasons.

The underlying problem is that FaceBook (and other major social media sites) have an oligopoly over social media, and a monopoly over their specific types of platforms.

The (market based) reason these companies can ban these people they disagree with is because there are no alternatives for people to go to for those who disagree with the decision to ban those people.

The "solutions" described in the article in the OP (and by others) involve *nothing* being removed ever, regardless of how harmful or bad the content is. I don't think this is a good solution because there is some content that really, reasonably *should not* be on social media.

I don't think it will ever be reasonable for this to happen.

Even without a "government" that regulates its people, it would always be possible for a number of people to forum an organization that creates regulations and imposes taxes on people in a certain area. I am specifically referring to something along the lines of the mafia or gangs we see today -- they use the threat of violence to impose rules on people that live in their "territory" and routinely extort money out of local businesses.

When there is a "government" it will be accountable to its people, but when the entity imposing the rules is a mafia/gang, they are not accountable to anyone.

In reality, not having a "government" that imposes taxes and regulations will result in less freedoms for the majority of people.

They cannot leave trust comments. I am not sure about the other two.

There is an argument a banned person (especially who is permabanned) should not have their votes counted for DT, and a separate argument that they should be excluded from DT2 (being excluded from DT1 will happen on its own). This is similar to how someone who does something bad enough that their freedom is taken away, also looses the right to vote.