show me 1 angry ICO investor who is out alot of money .
I havn't seen one($1,000+ loss)
only people i see whining are ones who lost nothing from dean. never got into ico
ifr someone scammed me for $1000+ i would be here everyday till i got it back.
dont see anyone here like that Not all investors are on Bitcointalk and not all investors want to publicly engage Dean. Of course, if we want to believe all accounts then there have been those that play on the new site as well as investors that have complained about the losses incurred through BetKing.
I did do the math: even if you took the ICO discount you're still at a ~50% loss from the removal of the buyback. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
|
|
|
Oh well, that is a bit controversial. It is true that the definition of a living creature is one that is born, develops, multiplies and dies. Virus can´t multiply by themselves, however neither can many parasites and they are considered living creatures. It's just the technicality of it. Parasites should be able to reproduce genetically on their own. They just rely on nutrition from other organisms. Viruses are no more alive than Von Neumann probes. |
|
|
|
Suggestion to forum administration :- Account buying and selling should not be allowed in this forum. It's just cause many problems and few people got scammed in the process of buying accounts. Their is no reason that multiple accounts or buying and selling account should be allowed here.. Its just my thought.. Considering the forum doesn't moderate scams, it's unlikely that you're going to get anything out of requesting them to ban account sales. Users who get scammed in the process of buying accounts are similar to users that get scammed when they play a ponzi. You're doing something shady... and you get screwed over because of it. And with the account recovery procedures that you have at your disposal, I don't see any reason for account trading to even be as notable as it currently is. You have to wait at least two weeks after having the account in your hands... you have to duck around the forum. We already know it's wrong. Yet users will still do it. |
|
|
|
abuse is an abuse no exception,if someone not on DT did this do you think the same treatment will be done here? system is being abused wake up kid.
Basing on how you are addressing people, i think it's petty clear that you the kid here. Very immature. You said it's "Lauda's precious account", do you have any evidence to back up you claim? try to understand the statement above,his account not the the fucking alt of act stupid. What are you talking about? Which part was merit abuse? The: Lauda meriting a post of ChemicalSpillage Lauda meriting a post of ChemicalSpillage (prior to my alt reveal) ChemicalSpillage sending merit to various individuals (Quickseller incl.) Or perhaps something else? |
|
|
|
Yes - game-protect will be managing the escrow. Really? That's who you're going with? Don't multi-post. You can edit replies and do multiple quotes in one post. |
|
|
|
Exclusion is the best course of action.
Please any further debate should be on another thread then the outcome can be updated here. We do not wish a stream of deleted posts. Yes... these irrelevant points should be discussed on a separate thread.
What makes you assume we believe he is guilty? Nothing. you are seemingly trying to put words in our mouth. You are doing the same. We believe it "looks" bad but could have a believable and reasonable answer that would demonstrate it to be other wise. All that we know so far come from presumptions towards either side. We clearly said that in light of the OTHER instances of behavior that are far from optimal this should merely be NOTED down for further investigation at another time. Or to form part of the context in the future. So... character evidence? |
|
|
|
Who would you recommend I pm about people like this? I think the "report this post" link posts it to the section moderator; which in this type of instance the poster needs to be reviewed; not the post.. so im wondering if that type of report will go to the right place if you understand my thinking. Here is my one and only report button (modification of suchmoon's BCT report script) button_container.appendChild(create_button(post_container, "0 value", "Generic, vague, padded, and/or irrelevant post. Brings no new information. Zero value.", null, true)); It covers 99.9% of reportable posts. When you need to bring attention to the user itself, I would say to report a few posts of theirs with the comment "This user is spamming. Check their post history here: _______" |
|
|
|
Hhampuz is perhaps not look quite as bad as the other 2. But until the "truth" is known regarding the 0.5btc then it is best not to make any assumptions either way So then there we have it. No more regurgitated discussion because that's all we'll have without Hhampuz's reply... which I don't expect to come any time soon. You can start the precedence of assuming guilt based on unanswered accusations now if you'd like. |
|
|
|
1. He refuses to be transparent regarding his selection process for his sig campaigns. Thus opening himself, his projects and those he employs open to criticism and doubt. Putting the entire board at possible risk under certain conditions. WHY NOT BE TRANSPARENT?? Signature campaign selections don't need to be transparent. "Putting the entire board at possible risk" seems like you're seriously hyperbolizing the direness of the situation. If they're hired, they're hired. Quality of a participant is the most important thing but I don't expect Hhampuz to give me a detailed breakdown of how he gauges quality and how every single participant was selected. That would be ludicrous. 3. There is a matter of 0.5btc possibly being stolen from a project that he was working with. He has not answered to clear this matter up even if it is not true. The truth is still not known. Contrived accusations through assumptions via circumstantial evidence are interesting... but answering every accusation is quite a chore especially for someone so "popular". |
|
|
|
|
No credible service should be requesting your private keys, period.
The only reason you should give up your private keys is if you want someone to do whatever they want to your funds. Not to verify a balance or otherwise. That's what signed messages are for.
The problem with complex systems is that people are misinformed. Sending a private key is equivalent to sending someone your banking details as well as your identity as a whole.
Flag supported.
|
|
|
|
What legal recourse do we have? Any insight on this issue will be useful to many of us. The excuse of "you fucked up, your fault" is inherently dishonest when it comes to the blockchain since you will always be able to verify the fact that you were the one who sent the transaction via a signed message (save for some shitcoins). Manual verification wouldn't even be necessary since all you would have to do is create some process that checks if a signed message (of their choice) corresponds to the sending address... and then return it to the same address. Sure, some people wouldn't have luck with interexchange transactions or third-party services but that's not the primary issue. Unfortunately, you're looking at an exchange that literally orchestrates pump & dump schemes and I don't know if it would even be possible to hunt them down and take legal action.
Send support tickets... though you're not likely to have much luck there: some people have had their tickets in waiting hell for years. |
|
|
|
Should I be flagging these sorts of posts/people? Flagging via the flag system? Abso-fucking-lutely not. Flagging as in reporting either privately or publicly via a thread/forum post/PM to a moderator? Absolutely. The issue with the altcoin sections is that over 99% of posts on them are spam. I can attest to this because I have literally reported entire consecutive pages and actually increased my reporting accuracy from 97% to 99%. This was over a sample size of about 1800 reports. |
|
|
|
|
If only there were a way to add someone to your trust list without adding them to the central trust list...
(other than using your alt to do a depth-1 trust and then trusting your alt, which is also not a great solution)
Unfortunately, drama will plague users whether they're on DT or not. :/
|
|
|
|
Now who's going to support our abusive flags, cycle merit and usurp the forum?  |
|
|
|
Thanks for keeping my reputation clean, I'm giving my best to communicate everything we're doing/planning on this thread so people know what's going on.  We're definitely not aiming to scam anyone, we're hoping to establish our own business instead of working as hired web dev's.  With the time the changes will come, hopefully people stay tuned to witness them. Skepticism is what preserves money. It doesn't matter how good the product is, if it's not provably fair then you're at the whim of the owners. You have to trust that they aren't screwing you over... that's not a good precedent to set. After all, history repeats itself and we have plenty of examples in the past.
Hoping to see these changes ASAP. I would say, without a doubt, no crypto-based casino should operate without first establishing guaranteed fairness. |
|
|
|
|
(Bad) translation of the post:
"Hi, good time, I do not think it's skim. Because there are more than a million downloaders from Google Play, they also support the Beatins and Hubs exchanges."
Could be merit abuse, could not be. At the end of the day it doesn't matter because you cannot link Mone ro to leonard2016 (never mind the fact that the former account is inactive).
Leonard is already a scammer. Might be time for a flag but it shouldn't have to do with "possible" merit abuse.
|
|
|
|
This is from two years ago. Vod may have missed bL4nkcode. Humans are not perfect. |
|
|
|
|
What, exactly are you proposing?
A Paypal for Bitcoin trade, with the added stipulation of purchasing an airtime recharge?
Or... what is this?
|
|
|
|
I can only assume that Core.i7 has deleted his thread (in an attempt to cover up the ANN bumping service)... or it has been deleted by a moderator. Either way, I can't "support" the red trust based on the available evidence. I thought we couldn't delete threads we started? The currency exchange section is littered with threads titled "delete" or similar and the OP's post (only one usually) is something like "." Threads that break the forum rules are likely to be deleted. One method that scammers can use to "delete" threads is to post some irrelevant garbage and report themselves on an alt (or hope someone else to report it). The other main method is to try and bury it in Archival or something, but of course it doesn't hide the thread itself. Remember when archiving links to always keep a copy of the archive URL somewhere other than the thread. You might find it difficult to retrace, should anything like the first method happen. |
|
|
|
truth, he is doing this more than 3 years, I do not know how he does not get tired of it Perhaps the fact that guests cannot see trust and the fact that game-protect isn't the thread-starter means that there's little to prevent users from going to the site and believing they'll be compensated. After all, the "Hero Member" status means a lot more to outsiders than it does other members of the forum. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
