omg omg what did i just watch

I've seen better scams.

A quick update:

Saturday night I began to succumb to whatever I've been fighting the last few days. Sunday I managed to get out of bed to go to the doctor and get antibiotics for the beginning stages of bronchitis. This has not affected the timeline for unit completion, and parts sourcing has continued as both of these items are being handled by other members of the team. This has however affected my ability to address the concerns posted here and via email. Today will be catchup in answering questions and providing a more thorough update which should have been released Saturday night. Please be patient over the next 24 to 48 hours as mission critical tasks will be the priority to make sure the timeline does not go off track.

I'd say its fake...  '4 hours ago' mismatching the 'June 22nd' date, the first line of the article saying the '22th', the inaccurate full story link, comments disabled,  Something just seems off on that article.

Also, June 22 was a Saturday, not a Friday.

And this is the only blog post by "CNN's Melissa Gray and Dan Lothian".

It is definitely on cnn.com
IF it is fake, I would guess a CNN blogger has been hacked?

Just curious as to why the site would still work... I assume most seizures happen without notice.


EDIT: I will also mention the 'full story' link at the bottom doesn't work. Odd?  (it links to the NSA leaks story: http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/21/politics/nsa-leaks)

Well, as a moderator here, my personal responsibility and power here is solely limited to moderating posts/threads, and more recently, the banning of spammers. We (moderators) cannot check IPs (hence sockies), read PM's, query the database, give out scammer tags, and everything else.

That said, I do not have any meatspace ties with either of the other moderating team, and Garr here, and have never met with them in person at all. I'm living in the other part of the world right now, and while I would like to meet many of those from this forum, my geographical location restricts me from doing so. I certainly won't, and will not act against my own beliefs otherwise, and it is downright illogical and wrong to assume that I will obey everything here if theymos is off his rocker.

Also, while I am against of the entire notion of having alts/sockies here, I can certainly understand it that it would be downright impossible to ban such accounts especially with the advent of VPN's and TOR. It's better to state clearly that the forum is not against and actively catching alt-account users, then to give newbies a false sense of security thinking that the alt account issue is under control here. (which it is not, of course)


* God, I'd like to sticky the first paragraph with all of the requests I've been getting.

Alt accounts are useful in some cases, and they can't be effectively banned anyway. People can always use Tor to evade detection. So banning alt accounts outright would hurt good people more than bad people.

If I happen to see someone abusing alt accounts to break forum rules or scam, I will do something about it. BCB and others know that I am often helpful in these matters. But it's impossible to catch even a majority of abusive alt accounts (especially since very few people have access to IP logs for privacy reasons), so it's best for people to stay on their guard and assume that scammers using alt accounts won't be caught.

I'm saying his actions as a whole were partially incorrect (due to the fact he used an anonymous account), however the act of setting his own pricepoint wasn't. It seems people here are arguing that his setting of the pricepoint of his own items is morally incorrect, which I find ridiculous.

Hell, if you were to sell your own prized possession and the price people are willing to pay for it is below the price you're willing to sell at, wouldn't you want to manipulate the price?

I do, however, once again, agree 100% that the act of doing so using an anonymous account is very incorrect.

I completely agree to that, however it's beside the point. The point is the moral validity of manipulating the prices to his desire, which I find completely valid.

Had Garr255 warned he would "shill" his "auction" beforehand, it would remove the need to use a anonymous account.

If Garr255 hadn't of called it an auction, rather, a multi-person multi-account multi-person bargain that functions rather like an auction would you agree that what he did isn't morally incorrect?

It's a multiperson BARGAIN. He's allowed to change the price to whatever he wishes. The buying must make the decision to either buy or drop the at the current price Garr255 is offering.

It's ridiculous people think the mere fact that Garr255 is setting a price to something he is selling is morally wrong. Garr255 can do whatever he pleases with the price of what he is selling (As long as he commits to a buy). What's morally wrong of Garr's actions is the decision to keep this price manipulator anonymous. Had he revealed the existence and admitted to the use of the account before beginning the "auction", his actions would be completely free of any moral fault.

You should see all the wicked stuff that is done with *real money.

Wait!!!!!

You (your forum) refused to confirm Werner is Garr's sock puppet for how long?

You (your forum) refused to violate the sanctity of a deleted post for how long??

Now, just off hand, you quickly confirm that an account that makes Garr look bad _is_ a sock puppet.


Dude, this is REALLY wrong.  You are playing favorites.  You are using your position on this forum to promote your own interests and that of your friends.  You are doing this in a fashion that appears to be underhanded.  

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck; it is a duck.

You, theymos, are looking as bad as Garr and Josh.  Perhaps you should look to MNW as a role model of how to do the right thing.

I just considered not posting the above to protect my presence here.  Fuck that.  Go ahead.  Delete this post and ban my account if you think it necessary.

If this forum represents bitcoin, bitcoin will suffer a long time before it succeeds, if ever.