Oh no... theymos fed the troll, twice. This high-calorie diet will have him going for weeks now. If the ratings were removed then I think he would have less leeway in derailing threads. If you want the rants to stop, you should remove any inappropriate ratings against him and ask others to do the same.
It's already been done with marlboroza's feedback and it didn't work, he kept attacking everyone after the rating was removed. In fact most of CH's anti-DT butthurt originates from back then, even though it was a clear misunderstanding that was resolved quickly. CH is not the "let go" type and I don't think mods are considering trust ratings when a post is reported (nor should they). Lauda, TMAN and yogg still have negative trust against CH. I also don’t see him complaining about marlboroza, but I also don’t read his posts closely. If the ratings are removed, then theymos is going to be less tolerant of the off topic posts. If CH doesn’t stop the off topic posts after getting the ratings that are being applied improperly, then he will get banned. |
|
|
|
|
None of what you wrote in that post has anything to do with the OP of the thread you posted in.
Who reported a post doesn’t matter because it was a mod that reviewed the post and confirmed it was against the rules. You should expect a post that breaks the rules to eventually get reported.
I don’t report many posts anymore because it has turned into a contest for some people and I don’t like that, but that post is probably something I would report as being off topic.
|
|
|
|
My prediction is he will eventually get banned for trolling, and he will try to appeal that ban, and eventually his appeal account will get banned for trolling.
I will just leave this up here: There are 61 good reports against you in the last 60 days. You're going to get banned if you keep this up.
Technically speaking he might get banned for derailing threads/off topic posting... Edit: I think part of the reason he is being given so much leaway is because he is ultimately complaining about the trust system being used inappropriately against himself as he has DT rating that theymos has said are not an appropriate use of the trust system (he didn’t address CHs ratings specifically but in his general comments about trust ratings he did say this). If the ratings were removed then I think he would have less leeway in derailing threads. If you want the rants to stop, you should remove any inappropriate ratings against him and ask others to do the same. |
|
|
|
I'm fine with people doing whatever they want as long as they don't harm others. I'm just uncertain about drug use though coz once these people get addicted and sick they could resort to crime and we'd be paying for them through healthcare and prison.
It's not the drugs that make them turn to crime, and it's not the person who allows other to sell drugs that makes people addicted. [...] If you get addicted to eating pastry, and get overweight and unable to walk due to this addiction, who is to blame? The pastry, the bakers, or you? There are some illicit drugs that will cause a person to become addicted almost 100% of the time after a single dose, that do not have any medical benefits. Drug dealers will also sometimes give away illegal drugs to their frequent customers when they are upfront about being unable to pay, which ultimately results in it being more difficult to stop taking drugs once addicted, and to break the habit of taking harmful drugs. In each of these cases, it is the drug dealer that causes the addiction, even if disclosure is made.
I believe a lot of people blindly support Ulbrict because of his contribution to the bitcoin ecosystem, and not necessarily on the merits of the case and the underlying facts. The drug dealer doesn't cause anything. The drug dealer is taking advantage of human weakness and suffering sure, but at the end of the day people choose to do this, either the first time or subsequent times. People are responsible for their own choices. The drug war has been more destructive than the drugs themselves would ever be. If someone is selling a drug that causes addiction during the first dose, I don't think the person can be blamed for the subsequent times they take the drug. The ethics of legalizing (or prohibition) of drugs boils down to the harm to society (or lack thereof) when specific types of drugs are legalized. To get an idea as to the harm legalization of drugs does to society, take a look at San Francisco, Portland, or parts of Washington state. All of these places have prevalent drug use and drug dealing is largely ignored by police. The drug use often happens within large homeless camps that are very unsanitary to the extent that you should not use the shoes you wear if you visit one. Ulbrict believe it or not was taking the first steps toward regulation of this distribution by providing more safety for all involved, including incentives for quality control. They railroaded him to send a message that this is their racket, and not to interfere, not because his crimes deserved such a punishment under the law.
Yes, that was his public mission, however behind the scenes this was not the case. There were many scams on his platform, including exit scams, but perhaps you cannot blame him for this. When people stole from him, he allegedly tried to have them killed, but was unsuccessful because he was dealing with an undercover LE informant. When a second person stole (hundreds? of) thousands of dollars from various users in his site, he allegedly tried to have him killed, but failed to perform enough due diligence to even realize these people don't exist. IIRC, his business was insolvent for many months (if not longer) before it was forced to close due to multiple unexpected business expenses over many months. The murder for hire was not proven, however the undercover agent did know the location/identity of the person who had stolen from Ulbtict. |
|
|
|
|
I want to point out that the accounts all having the same transaction being sent to their addresses is probably them all receiving a payout from a signature campaign they were enrolled in at the same time.
If they were both created at the same time, consistently enroll in similar campaigns within minutes of eachother, and are last active within minutes of eachother, they are probably the same person. The most telling piece of evidence presented in this thread is the enrolling within minutes of eachother many times, and I don't think this can be explained away as a coincidence.
I don't believe these people are doing any kind of harm to anyone, even if the "TOS" of the campaign is along the lines of "one account per person". If someone is making very good posts, it would benefit the company being advertised if one person is using two accounts to advertise. If someone is making bad posts with two accounts, the campaign manager should have not accepted either account in the first place.
I looked at their history, and think they are probably harmless. If they were to scam, I would prefer they be not exposed as alts until after they have (tried to) harm someone. The reason for this, is if they use oegarod to scam for example, he might think he is only risking the reputation and income generated by oegarod, but if the reputation and income from slackcryptoz is also affected, the scam may not be profitable for him. Also, if it is seen that scammers lose reputation/income from many accounts they control they thought were not connected, then others will be more hesitant to scam in the first place. Lastly, someone reviewing these types of threads can see what they can do to avoid detection, and not lose the reputation/income of their alt accounts when they harm someone via scamming.
|
|
|
|
Profile: julius caesarSubstantially copying investopedia article about RSI, translating it, and asking to get merit for it. Untranslated Copy (removed images): Ano nga ba ang RSI?Ang Relative Strength Index (RSI) ay isang tagapagpahiwatig ng momentum na sumusukat sa magnitude ng kamakailang mga pagbabago sa presyo upang masuri ang overbought o oversold na mga kondisyon sa presyo ng isang stock o iba pang mga asset. Ang RSI ay ipinapakita bilang isang osileytor (isang linya ng graph na gumagalaw sa pagitan ng dalawang magpakalabis) at maaaring magkaroon ng pagbabasa mula sa 0 hanggang 100. Ang indicator ay orihinal na binuo ni J. Welles Wilder at ipinakilala sa kanyang seminal na aklat na 1978, "New Concepts in Technical Trading Systems. " OVERBOUGHT AT OVERSOLD[img ]https://i.postimg.cc/HL8Nnrd6/FB-IMG-1553726432040.jpg[/img] Ang tradisyunal na interpretasyon at paggamit ng RSI ay ang mga halaga ng 70 o sa itaas ay nagpapahiwatig na ang isang seguridad ay nagiging overbought o overvalued at maaaring ma-primed para sa isang trend reversal o corrective pullback sa presyo. Ang pagbabasa ng RSI na 30 o mas mababa ay nagpapahiwatig ng oversold o undervalued condition. MGA TIPS PARA SA PAG-UNAWA SA OVERBOUGHT AT OVERSOLD[img ]https://i.postimg.cc/BQZwDYJL/FB-IMG-1553726493296.jpg[/img] Ang pangunahing trend ng stock o asset ay isang mahalagang kasangkapan sa pagtiyak na ang mga pagbabasa ng tagapagpahiwatig ay nauunawaan nang maayos. Halimbawa, ang kilalang tekniko ng merkado na si Constance Brown, CMT, ay nagpo-promote ng ideya na ang isang oversold pagbabasa sa RSI sa isang uptrend ay malamang na mas mataas kaysa sa 30%, at ang overbought na pagbabasa sa RSI sa isang downtrend ay mas mababa kaysa sa 70% na antas. Tulad ng makikita mo sa sumusunod na tsart, sa panahon ng isang downtrend, ang RSI ay magiging pinakamataas na malapit sa antas ng 50% sa halip na 70%, na maaaring magamit ng mga mamumuhunan upang mas madaling maipahiwatig ang mga bearish kondisyon. Maraming mamumuhunan ang maglalapat ng isang pahalang na trendline na nasa pagitan ng 30% o 70% na antas kapag ang isang malakas na trend ay nasa lugar upang mas mahusay na makilala ang mga magpakalabis. Pagbabago ng mga antas ng overbought o oversold kapag ang presyo ng isang stock o asset ay nasa pang-matagalang, pahalang na channel ay kadalasang hindi kailangan. Mga Diskarte para sa Paggamit ng RSI IndicatorDivergences Ang isang bullish divergence ay nangyayari kapag ang RSI ay lumilikha ng isang oversold reading na sinusundan ng isang mas mataas na mababa na tumutugma sa naaayon sa mas mababang mga hilig sa presyo. Ipinapahiwatig nito ang pagtaas ng bullish momentum, at ang break sa itaas oversold teritoryo ay maaaring magamit upang mag-trigger ng isang bagong mahabang posisyon. SWING REJECTIONS BULLISH (PAG-ANGAT)[img ]https://i.postimg.cc/brhWKqX3/FB-IMG-1553726397963.jpg[/img] Ang iba pang mga pamamaraan sa trading ang pagtukoy sa behavior ng RSI kapag muling umuusbong mula sa overbought o oversold territory. Ang signal na ito ay tinatawag na isang bullish "swing rejection" at mayroong apat na bahagi: 1- Ang RSI ay lumagpas sa overbought territory nito. 2- Ang RSI ay tumatawid pabalik sa 30%. 3- RSI bumubuo ng isa pang dip nang hindi tumatawid pabalik sa oversold teritoryo. 4- Pagkatapos ay nilalagpasan nito ang kamakailang kataasan. Tulad ng makikita mo sa mga susunod na tsart, ang RSI indicator ay oversold, nabasag sa pamamagitan ng 30% at nabuo ang mababang pagtanggi na nag-trigger ng signal kapag ito ay tumalon mas mataas. Ang paggamit ng RSI sa ganitong paraan ay katulad ng pagguhit ng mga trendline sa isang tsart ng presyo. SWING REJECTIONS BEARISH (PAG-BABA)[img ]https://i.postimg.cc/L89RJBbN/FB-IMG-1553726307345.jpg[/img] Tulad ng mga divergences, mayroong isang bearish na bersyong signal swing rejection na mukhang isang mirror na imahe ng bullish na bersyon. Mayroong apat na bahagi ang isang pagtanggi sa bearish swing. 1- Ang RSI ay tumaas sa overbought territory. 2- Ang RSI ay tumatawid pabalik sa 70%. 3- Ang RSI tumataas na hindi tumatawid pabalik sa overbought territory. 4- Pagkatapos ay nilagpasan nito ang kamakailang kababaan. PANOORIN ANG YOUTUBE RSI TUTORIAL https://youtu.be/rgVdgR1y1Dg Translated copy (via Chrome): What is RSI?
The Relative Strength Index (RSI) is a momentum indicator that measures the magnitude of recent price changes to assess the overbought or oversold conditions in a stock or other assets. The RSI is shown as an oscillator (a line graph that moves between two extremes) and may have readings from 0 to 100. The indicator was originally developed by J. Welles Wilder and introduced in his seminal book 1978, "New Concepts in Technical Trading Systems."
OVERBOUGHT AND OVERSOLD
The traditional interpretation and use of RSI is that values of 70 or above indicate that a security becomes overbought or overvalued and may be primed for a reversal trend or corrective pullback in price. RSI reading of 30 or less indicates an oversold or undervalued condition.
TIPS FOR OVERBOUGHT AND OVERSOLD INFORMATION
The main trend of stock or asset is an important tool in ensuring that indicator readings are understood properly. For example, the famous market technician Constance Brown, CMT, promotes the idea that an oversold RSI reading at an uptrend is likely to be higher than 30%, and overbought reading on RSI in a downtrend is less than 70% level.
As you can see in the following chart, during a downtrend, RSI will be the highest close to the 50% level instead of 70%, which investors can use to more easily imply bearish conditions. Many investors will apply a horizontal trendline of between 30% or 70% levels when a strong trend is in place to better identify extremes. Changing overbought or oversold levels when the price of a stock or asset is in the long-term, horizontal channel is often unnecessary.
Techniques for Using RSI Indicator
Divergences
A bullish divergence occurs when the RSI creates an oversold reading followed by a higher low match corresponding to the lower price tendencies. This implies increasing bullish momentum, and the break above oversold territories can be used to trigger a new long position.
SWING REJECTIONS BULLISH
Other trading procedures define the RSI behavior when re-emerging from overbought or oversold territory. This signal is called a bullish "swing rejection" and there are four parts:
1- The RSI exceeds its overbought territory.
2- The RSI is crossing back to 30%.
3- RSI forms another dip without crossing back into oversold territory.
4- Then it surpasses its recent superiority.
As you can see in the next chart, the RSI indicator is oversold, broken by 30% and low rejection triggered signal when it jumps higher. The use of RSI in this way is similar to drawing the trendline on a price chart.
SWING REJECTIONS BEARISH
Like divergences, there is a bearish signal swing rejection version that looks like a mirror image of the bullish version. There is a decline in the bearish swing.
1- RSI has risen to the overbought territory.
2- The RSI is crossing back to 70%.
3- The RSI rises not crossing back to the overbought territory.
4- After it has exceeded its recent lowliness.
LEARN THE YOUTUBE RSI TUTORIAL Original: What Is The Relative Strength Index - RSI?
The relative strength index (RSI) is a momentum indicator that measures the magnitude of recent price changes to evaluate overbought or oversold conditions in the price of a stock or other asset. The RSI is displayed as an oscillator (a line graph that moves between two extremes) and can have a reading from 0 to 100. The indicator was originally developed by J. Welles Wilder Jr. and introduced in his seminal 1978 book, New Concepts in Technical Trading Systems.
Traditional interpretation and usage of the RSI is that values of 70 or above indicate that a security is becoming overbought or overvalued and may be primed for a trend reversal or corrective pullback in price. An RSI reading of 30 or below indicates an oversold or undervalued condition.
Key Takeaways
The RSI is a popular momentum oscillator developed in 1978.
The RSI compares bullish and bearish price momentum plotted against the graph of an asset's price.
Signals are considered overbought when the indicator is above 70% and oversold when the indicator is below 30%.
The Formula For RSI Is
The relative strength index (RSI) is computed with a two-part calculation that starts with the following formula:
The average gain or loss used in the calculation is the average percentage gain or losses during a look-back period. The formula uses positive values for the average losses.
The standard is to use 14 periods to calculate the initial RSI value. For example, imagine the market closed higher seven out of the past 14 days with an average gain of 1%. The remaining seven days all closed lower with an average loss of -0.8%. The calculation for the first part of the RSI would look like the following expanded calculation:
Once there are 14 periods of data available, the second part of the RSI formula can be calculated. The second step of the calculation smooths the results.
How To Calculate RSI
Relative Strength Index (RSI)
Using the formulas above, RSI can be calculated, where the RSI line can then be plotted alongside an asset's price chart.
The RSI will rise as the number and size of positive closes increase, and it will fall as the number and size of losses increase. The second part of the calculation smooths the result, so the RSI will only near 100 or 0 in a strongly trending market.
TradingView.
As you can see in the above chart, the RSI indicator can remain in "overbought" territory for extended periods while a stock is in an uptrend. The indicator can stay in "oversold" territory for a long time while a stock is in a downtrend. This can be confusing for new analysts, but learning to use the indicator within the context of the prevailing trend will clarify these issues.
What Does RSI Tell You?
The primary trend of the stock or asset is an important tool in making sure the indicator's readings are properly understood. For example, well-known market technician Constance Brown, CMT, has promoted the idea that an oversold reading on the RSI in an uptrend is likely much higher than 30%, and an overbought reading on the RSI during a downtrend is much lower than the 70% level.
As you can see in the following chart, during a downtrend, the RSI would peak near the 50% level rather than 70%, which could be used by investors to more reliably signal bearish conditions. Many investors will apply a horizontal trendline that is between 30% or 70% levels when a strong trend is in place to better identify extremes. Modifying overbought or oversold levels when the price of a stock or asset is in a long-term, horizontal channel is usually unnecessary.
TradingView.
A related concept to using overbought or oversold levels appropriate to the trend is to focus on trading signals and techniques that conform to the trend. In other words, using bullish signals when the price is in a bullish trend and bearish signals when a stock is in a bearish trend will help to avoid the many false alarms the RSI can generate.
Example Of How To Use The RSI Indicator
Divergences
A bullish divergence occurs when the RSI creates an oversold reading followed by a higher low that matches correspondingly lower lows in the price. This indicates rising bullish momentum, and a break above oversold territory could be used to trigger a new long position.
A bearish divergence occurs when the RSI creates an overbought reading followed by a lower high that matches corresponding higher highs on the price.
As you can see in the following chart, a bullish divergence was identified when the RSI formed higher lows as the price formed lower lows. This was a valid signal, but divergences can be rare when a stock is in a stable long-term trend. Using flexible oversold or overbought readings will help identify more valid signals than would otherwise be apparent.
TradingView.
Swing Rejections
Another trading technique examines the RSI's behavior when it is re-emerging from overbought or oversold territory. This signal is called a bullish "swing rejection" and has four parts:
RSI falls into oversold territory.
RSI crosses back above 30%.
RSI forms another dip without crossing back into oversold territory.
RSI then breaks its most recent high.
As you can see in the following chart, the RSI indicator was oversold, broke up through 30% and formed the rejection low that triggered the signal when it bounced higher. Using the RSI in this way is very similar to drawing trendlines on a price chart.
TradingView.
Like divergences, there is a bearish version of the swing rejection signal that looks like a mirror image of the bullish version. A bearish swing rejection also has four parts:
RSI rises into overbought territory.
RSI crosses back below 70%.
RSI forms another high without crossing back into overbought territory.
RSI then breaks its most recent low.
The following chart illustrates the bearish swing rejection signal. As with most trading techniques, this signal will be most reliable when it conforms to the prevailing long-term trend. Bearish signals in negative trends are less likely to generate a false alarm.
TradingView.
The Difference Between RSI and MACD
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) is another trend-following momentum indicator that shows the relationship between two moving averages of a security’s price. The MACD is calculated by subtracting the 26-period Exponential Moving Average (EMA) from the 12-period EMA. The result of that calculation is the MACD line. A nine-day EMA of the MACD, called the "signal line," is then plotted on top of the MACD line, which can function as a trigger for buy and sell signals. Traders may buy the security when the MACD crosses above its signal line and sell, or short, the security when the MACD crosses below the signal line.
The RSI aims to indicate whether a market is considered to be overbought or oversold in relation to recent price levels. The RSI calculates average price gains and losses over a given period of time; the default time period is 14 periods with values bounded from 0 to 100.
The MACD measures the relationship between two EMAs, while the RSI measures price change in relation to recent price highs and lows. These two indicators are often used together to provide analysts a more complete technical picture of a market.
These indicators both measure momentum in a market, but because they measure different factors, they sometimes give contrary indications. For example, the RSI may show a reading above 70 for a sustained period of time, indicating a market is overextended to the buy side in relation to recent prices, while the MACD indicates the market is still increasing in buying momentum. Either indicator may signal an upcoming trend change by showing divergence from price (price continues higher while the indicator turns lower, or vice versa).
Limitations Of The RSI
The RSI compares bullish and bearish price momentum and displays the results in an oscillator that can be placed alongside a price chart. Like most technical indicators, its signals are most reliable when they conform to the long-term trend. True reversal signals are rare and can be difficult to separate from false alarms. A false positive, for example, would be a bullish crossover followed by a sudden decline in a stock. A false negative would be a situation where there is bearish crossover, yet the stock accelerated suddenly upwards.
Since the indicator displays momentum, as long as ab asset's price momentum remains strong (either up or down) the indicator can stay in overbought or oversold territory for long periods of time. Therefore, the RSI is most trustworthy in an oscillating market when the price is alternating between bullish and bearish periods. edit: He similarly plagiarized the macd article on investopedia in his translated thread about the same. The articles have different authors. |
|
|
|
If I give you merit in this thread, you can apply again one month from when when I sent you merit. I changed how much merit I will send after you applied. |
|
|
|
Simple question Stack, were the hashes given to you on March 6? Are those hashes in a conversation between you and Nightwanderer?
Yeah, apparently I was sent the hashes for two games, which I found out today. I didn't make use of them; I didn't even know what they were, and as you can see in the video, I simply ignored them. I know, and you know, that I played fairly and without cheating. If you consider NightWanderer's video enough to not pay me, I can understand your decision. I see why you think I cheated, and I see why this is your new excuse. It's a good one. I, on the other hand, don't believe my funds should be withdrawn until you can actually prove that I made use of the two hashes (which I didn't). Ball's in your court now. When did you receive these hashes? Before or after your wins on CrashDoge? Before, but as you can see, I ignored them. I didn't even know what they were or how to use them. So far, what crashingcrypto has provided is not even close to proof of me cheating. Him and I both know I won fairly. If you had the hash before you played then you could calculate the outcome of every round. You also won a ridiculous amount that is very close to certain to not happen fairly. BTW, you were also going into playing trying to 100x your deposit which is also very unlikely to happen. You need to give back what you withdrew. You are in the wrong. |
|
|
|
Simple question Stack, were the hashes given to you on March 6? Are those hashes in a conversation between you and Nightwanderer?
Yeah, apparently I was sent the hashes for two games, which I found out today. I didn't make use of them; I didn't even know what they were, and as you can see in the video, I simply ignored them. I know, and you know, that I played fairly and without cheating. If you consider NightWanderer's video enough to not pay me, I can understand your decision. I see why you think I cheated, and I see why this is your new excuse. It's a good one. I, on the other hand, don't believe my funds should be withdrawn until you can actually prove that I made use of the two hashes (which I didn't). Ball's in your court now. When did you receive these hashes? Before or after your wins on CrashDoge? |
|
|
|
It sounds like the basis for you saying there is unethical behavior is that HostFat is using a referral link in his signature for an exchange you believe is untrustworthy.
I don't think this reaches the point of it being necessary to take forum action.
As a moderator , he/she should distance from all the services that does not look fair. Theymos removed Benson Samuel when hack incident happened on the exchange in which Benson was CEO though there are no evidences/allegations against Benson. wearing an affiliate link in his signature is different from running an exchange that is going to impose losses to their customers because what was ultimately his mistake. |
|
|
|
Regardless of if CrashDoge brought up the topic of alleged cheating, it appears there was cheating going on in their casino, and you were aware of it.
As I said earlier, I became aware of the "cheating" only a few days ago. While I was playing, I had no knowledge that this was going on, nor did the site owners. When did you meet the dev that was giving out the server seed? How did you meet him? Do you know who else the dev was giving the server seed out to? What was his criteria in deciding who to give the server seed to? |
|
|
|
Here's the conversation with me and the developer of CrashDoge, who was the one who had the game hashes. https://gyazo.com/1a0b085cdb15ba54b1d077cef44834ebI personally never had access to the hashes, although the dev (NightWanderer) and other players did. I also don't appreciate you making videos that contain my name and address. That's really quite tacky, and it puts you in a whole new world of trouble, legally speaking. As for the child porn shit, that was a joke. I'm sure I don't need to explain it to you further. You can take it up legally, if you like. My settlement offer expires in about 3 days, after which I will be taking action against your scam and your illegal/fraudulent operation, as well as your defamation of me via YouTube. You're more than welcome to retaliate, because I know I have done nothing wrong. So did you know the outcome of the games in advance? No, I did not. That would be cheating. HERPES has from the beginning been switching up his excuse, and he now finally arrives with testimony from a scammer and some doctored screenshots as his final word. No matter what bullshit he comes up with, I'm going to ensure that I either see these two frauds in prison, or I get my money back. He knows who I am, he knows where I live, he knows my university - if I cheated, I'd be a lot more scared, but all I can say to him is come at me. I know the truth, and everyone knows that what he is doing is wrong. So I can be sure we are on the same page as to what you are claiming, I am going to repeat it in my own words: You are claiming that you turned 5,000 doge into 6mm doge (you won 1200x your deposit) at a time when: *You were talking to the site's dev who was giving out the site's server seed *Other players were using the leaked server seed to your advantage *You were aware the dev was giving out the server seed to other players, but: *You were *not* using the leaked server seed to your advantage Is the above an accurate representation of what you are saying happened? [...] As you can see from the video I provided, I only found out that NightWanderer was sharing the hashes a few days ago. I did not know this was going down at the time I was playing. Keep in mind that this "cheating" bullshit is brand new. They had no intention to pay me out from the beginning, as is evident from my other thread, where they use the KYC/age excuse. They're only bringing up cheating because NightWanderer "came clean" and because cheating is a far more convenient scapegoat when it comes to not paying me out. If they don't pay me because of the KYC/age excuse, the community sees them as scammers (like a few weeks ago), but if they can create some fake evidence that shows I cheated, then suddenly they redeem themselves in the eyes of the community, and their license money doesn't go to waste. [...] You didn't answer my question, is what I said an accurate representation of what you are saying happened? You are claiming that you turned 5,000 doge into 6mm doge (you won 1200x your deposit) at a time when:
*You were talking to the site's dev who was giving out the site's server seed
*Other players were using the leaked server seed to your advantage
*You were aware the dev was giving out the server seed to other players, but:
*You were *not* using the leaked server seed to your advantage Also, it would not be unexpected to not bring up suspected cheating if the site operator's hope is to obtain ID/KYC information of the cheater (to eventually provide to law enforcement). Regardless of if CrashDoge brought up the topic of alleged cheating, it appears there was cheating going on in their casino, and you were aware of it. |
|
|
|
Here's the conversation with me and the developer of CrashDoge, who was the one who had the game hashes. https://gyazo.com/1a0b085cdb15ba54b1d077cef44834ebI personally never had access to the hashes, although the dev (NightWanderer) and other players did. I also don't appreciate you making videos that contain my name and address. That's really quite tacky, and it puts you in a whole new world of trouble, legally speaking. As for the child porn shit, that was a joke. I'm sure I don't need to explain it to you further. You can take it up legally, if you like. My settlement offer expires in about 3 days, after which I will be taking action against your scam and your illegal/fraudulent operation, as well as your defamation of me via YouTube. You're more than welcome to retaliate, because I know I have done nothing wrong. So did you know the outcome of the games in advance? No, I did not. That would be cheating. HERPES has from the beginning been switching up his excuse, and he now finally arrives with testimony from a scammer and some doctored screenshots as his final word. No matter what bullshit he comes up with, I'm going to ensure that I either see these two frauds in prison, or I get my money back. He knows who I am, he knows where I live, he knows my university - if I cheated, I'd be a lot more scared, but all I can say to him is come at me. I know the truth, and everyone knows that what he is doing is wrong. So I can be sure we are on the same page as to what you are claiming, I am going to repeat it in my own words: You are claiming that you turned 5,000 doge into 6mm doge (you won 1200x your deposit) at a time when: *You were talking to the site's dev who was giving out the site's server seed *Other players were using the leaked server seed to your advantage *You were aware the dev was giving out the server seed to other players, but: *You were *not* using the leaked server seed to your advantage Is the above an accurate representation of what you are saying happened?
Stack, the guy already came clean and told us. https://i.ibb.co/KbJPGDM/5-D4129-E8-EE8-A-4-F39-B0-D4-4-D09-C01-B0-B48.pngThe game is over, quit your bullshit and go bother somebody else. If you wouldn't have cheated, you would have gotten paid. You aren't getting anything, what you did is nothing more than fraud. End of discussion. Also, pay your damn loans back. Stop borrowing money and not repaying it. You not paying me had nothing to do with your bogus cheating accusation, it was due to the KYC excuse, as is documented in the other thread where you were revealed to be a scammer. Also, please show me a gif or video of that conversation as I have, because that appears to be completely doctored. I know that NightWanderer sent the hashes to other players, but I personally never received them. My settlement offer is expiring soon. Tick tock, Brett 'n Keith. They said they wanted to complete KYC. If they had reason to believe you were cheating, it would be entirely understandable for them to want to complete KYC, and it would also be understandable if they did not payout your reflected balance. |
|
|
|
Here's the conversation with me and the developer of CrashDoge, who was the one who had the game hashes. https://gyazo.com/1a0b085cdb15ba54b1d077cef44834ebI personally never had access to the hashes, although the dev (NightWanderer) and other players did. I also don't appreciate you making videos that contain my name and address. That's really quite tacky, and it puts you in a whole new world of trouble, legally speaking. As for the child porn shit, that was a joke. I'm sure I don't need to explain it to you further. You can take it up legally, if you like. My settlement offer expires in about 3 days, after which I will be taking action against your scam and your illegal/fraudulent operation, as well as your defamation of me via YouTube. You're more than welcome to retaliate, because I know I have done nothing wrong. So did you know the outcome of the games in advance? |
|
|
|
StackGambler is very shady, I am very suspicious of him, but I am not sure who he is.
He is easily identified by googling StackGod dox Pops up he scammed over 7 btc from GambleCrash So he is from singapore? Do you know if he goes by any other names around here (on bitcointalk)? I have someone in mind, but I don't remember if he is/was from Singapore or Sweden, and don't have notes on him. |
|
|
|
|
It sounds like the basis for you saying there is unethical behavior is that HostFat is using a referral link in his signature for an exchange you believe is untrustworthy.
I don't think this reaches the point of it being necessary to take forum action.
|
|
|
|
StackGambler is very shady, I am very suspicious of him, but I am not sure who he is. One of the photos seems to imply he had the server seed of CrashDoge when he turned 5,000 doge into 6mm doge. The owner of the website had asked StackGambler to provide his ID, and both this and the reason why providing ID was refused was probably because there was cheating on the part of StackGambler. edit: corrected win to reflect 6mm doge, not 4mm |
|
|
|
So he either buy merits somewhere or those two accounts who just gave him merit is his alt so that he can qualify I don’t think this can ever be proven with certainty because it is always possible someone wants to make the person look bad by giving merit to someone on a post that shouldn’t reasonably receive merit. Also, someone could be reviewing the persons posts, decide they deserve merit and give merit for the wrong post. I am still pondering how to tell if someone is selling or buying merit and my reasoning is a work in progress. I think it is best to look at the merit (send) history of the person sending merit and if they have sent small amounts to many posts that don’t deserve merit then they might be selling merit. From there, you can look at the (receive) merit history of who received merit from these people on posts that don’t deserve merit and look at who else has sent them merit and see if they have also sent merit to many undeserving posts. I posted analysis of a case of suspected merit abuse here that didn’t get much attention, however it can be used as an example as to how to use the above logic. |
|
|
|
|
I don’t think this is so much about freedom but is more about public safety.
It needs to be noted that vaccines are absolutely safe and the antivaxxers rely on disinformation and propaganda. There have been many studies over a long time that confirm this safety.
Some children however are not healthy enough to receive certain vaccines and as such cannot receive them. If children who can receive the vaccines don’t, then those who cannot are being put at risk.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting information.
A couple of things...
Instead of “percent difference” a more useful stast would be “percent change from last month” (the difference between the net number of new posts this month from last momth. Also useful would be percent chance from last year. As boards have more and more posts, each additional 1,000 new net posts will have a smaller impact on the percentage of new posts.
For comparison, it would be useful to also see net new posts in the English sections, possibly split up between the main boards and the altcoin boards. In general, interest in bitcoin rises and falls with prices and with prices way down from the highs in 2017, interest has also fallen, and I would expect the number of new posts to have declined from December 2017.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
