I never said it did start with that. In fact, I think this is very relevant. You clearly lost the plot with me after the accusation and people painted the m_dayonliner account. You were seemingly ok and well behaved before that even though I left the original escrow feedback. Why would you even care about the accusation if it wasn't true or wasn't yours? I think you care because it likely is actually true and I effectively ruined that account you were busy working hard on to build your reputation and merit. Same goes for Retina. I only posted what I saw were very suspicious coincidences. Others found more and I'm not the only one who believes you are the same.

I'm not going to respond to mdayonliner's off topic posts in his attempts to derail the thread to suit his argument so the responses to the deleted ones will go here. Any discussion about my reputation as a user or moderator doesn't belong in a thread about Yobit's signature campaign but feel free to create separate ones in Meta or Reputation.

Deleted post:


Response:



No, signature campaign managers are hired to do that job (or are not in many cases). Campaign managers are actually paid handsomely and so they should be because it's a lot of work and a full time job in of itself but I'd love to see them work for free and nowhere in my 'job' description does it say I must be responsible for signature spam. There's gallons of shit flooding the forum 24/7 that mods shouldn't have to deal with in the first place and I've suggested plenty of ways to try improve or stop that to theymos. If I'm hired to manage an office that doesn't mean I have to clean the toilets and the litter in the streets outside as well. Not my job, but I've gone out of my way to try stop the flow of shit several times when I don't need to. Do you see any other mods wasting their time writing things like the signature campaign guidelines? Nope. The money I earn from this forum might be 'handsome' to some people like you but is a pittance in respect to the amount of work I put in here and it wouldn't even amount to a part-time job in my country and I would certainly be getting paid under minimum wage for the amount of hours I put in here so if all I cared about was money I would be here half the time that I am and earning money elsewhere.


How do you think I became a mod in the first place? And people report posts for many different reasons. Some do it for purely altruistic reasons and to help out but some also do it for potential financial gain as well because they hope they might be able to get a staff position here. I'm guessing you were also one of them. Once they realise that isn't going to happen many of them conveniently stop and I've seen it happen several times before. There was also a huge spike in reporting from certain users when theymos announced he was going to give out badges for high reporters and stuff that never materialised so don't make out like people like you purely do it for the love of the forum because it's BS. If that was true you'd still be doing it but there's obviously nothing in it for you now. Once you can't earn from here on an account you discard it only to re-animate it once you can (like now how you found a loophole on yobit to get paid with negative feedback on this account even though it's against their terms.).


Not true at all and yet another biased assumption from you. I could probably handle half of the reports I currently do and I would still get paid the same. I go above and beyond almost everyday even though I know I don't need to handle as many reports as I do but I do what I can when I can. I've probably been one of it not the most active mods here for the past several years (though I think Rickbig probably handles more reports than I do these days so shout out to him).


You only don't like me because I called you out. Many others agreed with my evidence whether you like it or not. I'd also like you to point out where I've lied. Drawing comparisons and similarities between you and other users is not lying. You just can't handle that.


There isn't any. Master manipulation is laughable. What have I manipulated exactly and for what gain? What do I get from exposing you? Are you saying liars, scammers and merit abusers shouldn't be outed?


Where was I? I was watching you run around like a desperate child trying to spin the heat onto me for merely having a thread with the word Cloudbet in it. It was pathetically laughable and I already explained about this before but you conveniently ignored it. And the keyword here is "not sure". You weren't sure and neither was anybody else but you had a hard on for this case because you had a vendetta with me and that's all it was ever about. As I already explained I was actually watching the situation very closely. Had there been a scam I would have removed it. But there wasn't. Just an accusation and you jumped on that chance.

Also, I didn't personally get paid a single satoshi for the Cloudbet thread so you're wrong and barking up the wrong tree again just because it suits your narrative. The further irony here is you're also being a huge hypocrite advertising for yobit. There are plenty of scam accusations against yobit and here you are advertising for them because you have financial motive to do so. You don't care if you make money from ponzis at the expense of others as long as they enrich you and you are happy to advertise scams any opportunity you get. There was never a scam in the Cloudbet accusation and they actually rectified the situation very professionally, but that didn't stop you still trying to get me swept up into receiving negative feedback and your motives were clear from the start.


Why are you referring to yourself in the third person and why why do you keep saying this will be the last response when it never is. You disappeared below and sulked off claiming that this was going to be your last post in Reputation and Meta:


Then you magically reappeared like a genie three days later to immediately claim a free physical coin someone was giving away THREE minutes after the thread was created:


What a coincidence that you saw it so quick on an account that was MIA and temporarily abandoned. You popped back because you wanted some free coin. More proof that all you care about is coin. You likely won't ever go away. You'll always be lingering around on one alt or another because this forum is bank to you and this is why you're so annoyed. You weren't really getting all hot and bothered with me and losing your temper throwing childish names around until I made the thread about you being s_therapist then you got furious because it was obvious that the account you were working so hard on got ruined and all you want to do is to be able to have a highly trusted account here to earn and that's why you're so mad. Probably the same situation with Retina.

I wonder how much drama would actually stop if the feedback system was removed (or negative feedback doesn't paint you 'red'). No more hilariousandco vs mdayonliner? No more Lauda vs Quickseller? No more Cryptohunter vs Everybody? Sometimes I honestly think we should just do away with it because of all the drama it causes but it would only lead to more scams against the newer members. I wonder if we did remove it would we get threads every other day asking WHY ISNT THERE A FEEDBACK SYSTEM HERE in some variation or another.


That was a fairly unique case and I think they should be taken on a case by case basis. I think suchmoon stepped in to try take the account off the market because bruno was trying to sell it and suchmoon effectively gave him a loan so he didn't have to and the account didn't fall into the wrong hands (which would be a good thing or net positive). I could be wrong though. Isn't the account returned to the original owner now anyway? There are plenty of other users that used to take loans out with accounts as collateral but that practice seems to have fizzled out (especially by more notable members probably since account trading became frowned upon).

Well he's adamant that they're not ALTs so much so that he's seemingly been pestering theymos to check their IPs and to publicly post whether they're same or not as if that is concrete proof once and for all that they're not the same so he'll probably use an alt as normal regardless of any bans. I doubt mday is stupid enough to not use a proxy or different connection to each account either especially since he's so adamant IP evidence will vindicate him (it wont) but it doesn't explain why they behave exactly like each other in numerous other instances which are more than just a coincidence, but of course that's not concrete proof even though most can see that it's pretty damning evidence.


He's definitely going to run with the retina account now especially as it's clean (no negative) and he's been meriting it himself (which he likes to public boast about when he does). I'm sure retina will be much more active during the ban if it stays. He's trying to get it appealed in Meta (and I do think it was kinda harsh especially given many far worse youbit spammers escaped unharmed).


Ban evasion isn't really looked into by the admins at all sadly so he'd be free to post on that account even if he was using the same IP (which I doubt he is). The only time people get banned for ban evading is usually by globals if there's enough public proof that they're same (shared wallet addresses etc).


But don't forget that mday is a very influential person in Bangladesh hence why people purposely try to imitate him.

Edit: theymos removed the ban on mdayonliner which was probably the right decision.

This campaign has caused an outbreak of appalling spam that was spreading like wildfire within a mere few days and is a perfect example of what happens when campaigns don't care about the forum nor have a manager. If the signature campaign guidelines were enforced more like this with removal of signatures then the forum would be a much cleaner place. I really think we should look at alternative options for how campaigns can operate here. We can see that when we let people do what they want chaos ensues like it did with yobit and this is the second time it's happened with them, whereas campaigns that have managers who are doing their job properly like Chipmixer they actually have positive reputations amongst users and actually improve posts in my opinion.


I think the discussion was more about potential negative feedback for people promoting scams which I still think is relevant to discuss, though whether yobit is a scam exchange or promoting ponzis is a different matter (but their current own ICO does look like a ponzi scheme):


 

I've always called these sorts of users 'hit and runners'. They write a generic reply in a sentence or two usually having only read the title of the thread then move on to the next thread to rinse and repeat. It really kills the idea of a discussion board because they're not really engaging at all and they will rarely stay around long enough to see if someone has replied directly to them because it's irrelevant and that's why the board is full of spam. The amount of times I've engaged with people here and I never get a response is staggering. Basically the only people that tend to have discussions here are the 'big' or noticeable names.

Stake campaign has a really silly rule in that worsens this issue:


I think it was made with good intentions but it only exacerbates the problem. One thing I've noticed is that Stake spam is everywhere and I think this rule is partly why. Rather than sticking to threads they can have a conversation in they aren't going to get paid for any more than three posts in there so they naturally are unlikely to make any more than that. Imagine you're an expert in something or are very knowledgeable about a particular topic, well, once you've made your three posts in that thread there's no financial benefit for you to continue so off to another thread you might no little or nothing about. I'd much rather a person stick to talking about football in a football thread if he's very knowledgeable about that rather than leave and go find another thread to posts some generic nonsense in because he needs to get paid. Things like this just cause more harm than good whilst complicating the issue for everyone. If someone is spamming or making poor quality posts then they shouldn't be on the campaign or getting paid in the first place.

What's the point in just removing sigs from Meta? What does that solve? Any posts that are made purely for payment would just be moved elsewhere so it solves nothing other than certain users not being able to get paid whilst arguing with unstable idiots like cryptohunter and their ilk. If you're going to remove sigs from Meta then why not everywhere else? I'm not against banning signature campaigns either. What I am against is removing them from certain sections just because you suggest it. Pointless other than entertaining whatever rubbish cryptohunter aka you comes out with.


See here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2580400;sa=showPosts


I don't think you know the difference between opinion and fact (or 'observable truth' in this instance). 


I won't delete anything. Are you trying to tell me I'm not allowed to have an opinion on whether something is rubbish or not?


Go ahead. I don't care. You are free to create whatever threads you want but the thread will just end up like every other you create on this account and any others.


It is my opinion that you post rubbish. In my opinion I think you've probably got some mental issues that you should get help with, but I'm not a Doctor. Are you seriously trying to tell me my opinion is wrong? Is someone describing a piece of music or film as rubbish right or wrong?


Who exactly have a I vouched for? Anyone I have left feedback for or added to my trust list is done so because in my opinion I believe their feedbacks to generally carry weight or are on a whole good for the community, regardless of what petty beef they may or may not have got themselves in for.

But even with VAR the correct decisions are sometimes not made. We've already seen incorrect decisions happen using it. Sometimes decisions go in your favour and sometimes they don't. Sometimes people get punished for the same offence where no action was taken in another. Sometimes a foul is given when it was a complete dive. Sometimes they're not given when it's an obvious foul. Sometimes a player is fouled in the box but they keep on going rather than go down and nothing comes of it, but if he had of gone down a penalty would have been given. That's one thing I like about Messi. He hardly ever goes down and keeps fighting even if he's been hacked at and will usually try stay upright at any costs, but he could just as easily fall on the floor and get a penalty and in many cases I think he should have done, but that's the game for you. It's swings and round abouts. Where there's a human involved then there is both opinion and room for error and that won't change with VAR. It's good that it helps makes the right decision but at what cost? Ten minutes taken out of the game whilst refs decide on what to do over a few instances some of them very petty and made out of desperation from the opposing team?

If we're not going to rely on the officials then we might as well get rid of linesmen and maybe even referees all together. Maybe just let the decisions down to VAR or even just an algorithm so you take the human error out of it. Nothing is ever going to get it 100% right but we need to take the positives and negatives into account. VAR is only something that going to be happening in top flight football anyway whereas anyone else playing the game whether professional or amateur is still going to have to carry on the same without such technology.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I don't think you've been on many other forums if you think this forum is the worst for newbie discrimination and I've been on much worse ones where they treat Newbies like shit. In fact, I don't think there's that much hate against new users here, but here I think you're getting mere Newbies confused with spammers and shitposters. Nobody would care if someone signed up to this forum and made great posts but as you've already touched upon signature campaigns and ICO bounties drive people here in droves who don't even care about bitcoin in the slightest other than that they heard they can make some money here. When you have to read thousands of mindless comments purely being made for payment it's understandable why people are going to get annoyed with them specifically, but it's not strictly a newbie issue; it's just many of them happen to be newbies.

I've made the comparison before it's like people signing up to a Lamborghini forum when they don't like cars and can't even drive. Why would anyone sign up to a forum on a subject that they have no interest in? Well they generally don't. Unless that forum is bitcointalk and you can earn a living by posting drivel.


The people who tend to care about rank are usually those who only have financial interest in it in the first place. Most don't care about ranks and a truly great poster will breeze through them over time. Yes, it takes a long time but we've all had to go through that and ranks should mean something and should be earned, otherwise there's no point in them.


Both reporters and the staff that handle them do so on opinion and is purely subjective. Somebody might report something as spam and the staff may disagree. Staff here also don't get involved with scams but that doesn't mean the community shouldn't get involved with what they think is unjust. Should people turn a blind eye to scams and frauds just because they're not mods?


Sadly conspiracy theories are very common when you have a victim mentality or feel like you've been wronged somehow. It's much easier for as person to handle something if they create a story or narrative to make out like they're being persecuted for something when the reality of the situation is usually much more dull but the conspiracy theory is always the most exciting.




No it isn't. The problem with this forum is people get away with far too much with no repercussions at all. You are seemingly free to post rubbish across multiple accounts and you are left alone to do so. That doesn't mean you're not going to get treated like an idiot and people leaving you or anyone else negative feedback does not encroach on your freespeech. People seemingly love free speech until it punches them in the face and then they turn around and want that person banned, silenced or imprisoned somehow. That's pure hypocrisy If I've ever seen it. Freedom is good and people should be given as much as possible, but obviously there needs to be some restrictions because not everyone can play nice or by the rules.


I think they care but it's a combination of time, money and effort and balancing all that with as much freedom as possible which is ultimately what theymos seems to stand behind. Sadly everybody can't have it their own way and you're never going to appease everyone. Some people would prefer it if staff ruled with an iron fist whilst some think they should do nothing. Some think the way staff handle things currently is fine, but there is obviously always room for improvement.

I agree with this. If you feel like you're doing something wrong or compromising yourself by promoting something potentially shady then you should trust your instincts or morals. As for whether users on yobit deserve negative feedback or not that is an entirely different discussion.


Has he actually been on the campaign all this time though? I thought it shut down long ago and there's been quite a few inactive and barely active users that still seem to bare yobit's signature, but I just assumed they just never removed them or never joined another campaign. Has it been ticking over all this time? There were very few people left on that campaign from what I remember.

I'll respond to mdayonliner's completely off topic post in this thread here because I think what he said is relevant:

Deleted post:





I'll keep an eye out for it.


Well at least you can see that this is an alt with a clear agenda, so I'll give you that. Whoever it is is another debate but I wouldn't at all  be surprised if this account is just you being an idiot with some sort of preemptive defence by outing it so you can further whine like a baby about the situation and get some more drama out of it.

Just for the record, I'm not at all saying Mulann2 is his account and wouldn't have even thought so but mday's behaviour here in publicly drawing comparisons between the two is a little suspect and seems a bit too desperate to be noticed in my opinion.

And people are all for it for personal reasons as long as it financially benefits them regardless of the costs to the forum. You are obviously biased more than others and I'm guessing you have at least one account on that campaign. Most people who aren't on this campaign can look at it from a neutral perspective whilst those who are on the campaign obviously have great financial motive to defend it at all costs.


Most campaigns say they're against spam when in fact they do nothing. This would have been the case here if people hadn't kicked up a fuss about it.


Who is patting them on the back? I think their campaign is very poorly run and is a problem here and something should be done about it, but yobit has miraculously dwarfed the spam coming from that campaign in only a matter of days and that tells you a lot.



You're wrong here. Their original campaign was very poorly run and was infamous for the spam being caused because they had no manager and accepted everyone and paid everyone automatically and that's what's happening again. In fact, Yobit was the first campaign I left negative feedback against because the spam was appalling and they ignored all my messages to do something about it. Now they've got lots of negative more probably won't cause them any issues but we shouldn't be letting the issues they are causing slide.


If someone actively promotes a scam then they're liable for negative feedback. Whether you think Yobit is a scam or negative feedback is warranted on their users is a different discussion.


Why should mods be left to clean up their mess? They're not getting paid to run campaigns and that should be done by the companies and those who they employ to manage their business here. All badly run campaigns should be given a warning and then banned from the forum if they do nothing and that would include this campaign currently unless they clean up their act but admins don't seem to want to do that so it's left up to the community to decide on how to handle problem campaigns.




The very great irony here is that I personally wrote that years ago when I took over their campaign to clean it up and I was the one enforcing it at the time. Now nobody is. That's the problem so just pointing to that like they've got some standards here is null and void. Their campaign is full of shit posters and also negative feedback users so clearly nothing is happening regarding quality control at the moment and that needs to change.

Ref links are a grey area. Technically as per the rules, they're not allowed outside of the signature and many threads have been removed in the past if you post them for people to sign up with even if you offer payment to do so. Do I see anything wrong with that? Not really. I guess it's a kind of service and both people are making money from it as long as it's not a scam and they actually pay you. I've personally let many ref links slide in the Gambling section when tipsters have been giving out free tips, but removed plenty of other threads where people have posted their ref link whether they offer payment or not, but maybe we should rethink the rules on that for further clarification.


If a thread is sent to the trashcan you don't get a notification. That's how it's always been.


And there' probably many you haven't seen that were removed for doing the same. Mods don't spot everything and many will only act if they're actually reported by someone. With that thread it's not explicit either, though it's obviously very likely a ref links is involved.

The forum doesn't moderate scams so I don't think this is something the forum administration would get involved with, but there's also probably nothing anyone can do to prevent this. This sort of behaviour will happen in any scenario of auction whether it be on eBay or Sotherbys (or any other auction house). I would suggest those who partake in shill bidding instead just not bother with auctions and sell the item for the price they actually want rather than waste everybodies time in a scummy fashion.

Another decision that makes me think the offside rule should be changed. Should we really be disallowing goals for being inches off side or because you might have been a tiny bit off side at one point. It really doesn't matter. Sometimes the ref misses things and that's part of the game. VAR is still missing things but we have to stop the game for five minutes to find out. It's annoying seeing players wait in anticipation to see if the goal has been allowed or not or the opposite like last night where City thought they'd clinched it in the dying minutes and were going mental only to be told it wasn't a goal. Honestly, I don't even think off side should be checked. If the officials miss it then so be it.


It hit his arm then came off his thigh. They didn't show the angle that showed that clearly. The handball rule also needs to be changed in my opinion because there's far too much inconsistency. I don't think those sorts of handballs matter. It wasn't on purpose. It was accidental. Nothing could have been done about it but sometimes ref gives them and sometimes they don't and in this case VAR didn't even pick it up so what's the point of it? Had the other angle from behind the net been shown it probably would have been disallowed. Annoyed me last week with the penalty on Danny Rose. Yeah, it hit his hand but he couldn't have done anything about it and he was even booked for it. 

I think we should just get rid of this rule that people can advertise within threads because it just leads to confusion. I'm not explicitly against users doing it but isn't it unfair that some threads are allowed to be monetised whilst others aren't? We already have a rule that says no adverts outside of the signature but with this exception users see others doing it and then assume that it's ok for them to do so and they can advertise in any of their threads they want without prior permission.

It's obvious some users are just creating threads so they can try monetise them and this will only become more prevalent as others catch on. Look at the thread given as an example in the op. Not only does it have a blazing advert at the top of it he's also trying to monetise it in two other ways. He's left his bitcoin address at the bottom asking for tips and another alerting users to tell who sent them (probably because some of them offer kickbacks when someone sends them business their way):

I dunno. I think this will just lead to people trying to farm their feedback to try achieve the rank. I think there should be a new level above Legendary though. There's a big difference now between a new user signing up and eventually achieving legendary and someone who signed up a few years ago and just got it by being here a while. Maybe the activity to get Legendary should be changed so it all has to be earned merit and not airdropped and anyone who doesn't have sufficient merit is demoted to Hero. There's not really any benefits to being a Legendary over Hero anyway other than in name so it won't matter much. That would then at least give the rank some meaning. There's far too many Legendaries about now and there's probably not gonna be many more made naturally so I think there should be some distinction between those who just go lucky.

I've spoke about a new rank before. Fixing Legendary to 960 merit or upping it drastically would still be a good idea:

About 3:Fiddy GMT. From previous free slots becoming available it's not something Darkstar decides straight away and sometimes takes a day or so to go through all the applicants so you'll probably be alright to get a chance to apply. Also, as Joel_Jantsen said it's not first come first served so likely no priority will be given to early applicants unless you're very late to apply after he's already decided.

You don't need to bother with a spreadsheet if you just use a bookies that tells you your profit or loss. Skybet gives you the stats for 7 days, 30 days and 12 months. I'm sure others do as well. Either put x amount into your account every week (until you've built up a nice profit and you don't need to) or put in a lump sum for your bankroll that you're prepared to lose and if you do lose it then cut your losses and just quit. Hopefully that won't be the case and you can keep playing with your profits which is what I do and withdraw it at the end of the season or keep it there and keep going. People should be keeping track of their wins and losses because you'll have no idea how much you're truly winning or losing and things can go off the deep end if you don't. I think treating gambling like you do trading or with investing in bitcoin is a good idea (only play with what you can afford to lose), though I'd feel a little off calling gambling an investment personally. 

I think with betting it's best to see it as entertainment and a bit of fun rather than a way to make money. Sticking to £25 a week is cheaper than a night out or a takeaway and it adds extra excitement to the weekend for me so win or lose I've spent £25 on entertainment. If you stick to a bankroll and only betting a certain amount each week things won't spiral out of control and you won't start to chase your losses. When the Premier/Champions League is over I don't bet at all unless there's an international tournament on, but I stick to £100-£150 for my bankroll for that.