Yes, he indeed posted on your thread for "no reason". Do not ever PM-spam me again; my response was rather nice. So what's with that post? Are you saying you have no idea who that is or why he'd suddenly write a post stating the bounty was over? I haven't read the whole thread past that post, but it does seem odd that Wipro would write that in your thread for no reason--and in the same oversized font, as well. No, no. It's common for other BMs to post updates in the bounties that "you manage" for no reason and for you to never mention anything about it anywhere. 
Are the following account also not related to your "management services": Maycornslhardyaibb |
|
|
|
I blame myself for not withdrawing my funds ...
Those were not your funds. Not your keys = not your funds. Those were IOUs which you've now lost. Anyone who is using an exchange as an wallet has nobody else to blame but themselves. Cryptopia was a horrible exchange to begin with. |
|
|
|
|
1) He does not have to do anything.
2) He is not DT.
3) Wrong section.
/thread
|
|
|
|
|
It's simple really: Spend 10 minutes reading into why every mail protocol ever made is absolute garbage, then stop doing any trades via email.
|
|
|
|
-snip-
I tag for everything that you've said no to (and will obviously continue to do so), especially ANN bumping services. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Yuck. Don't privately suggest anything that even remotely looks like a bribe or anything else that is illegal. -snip-
And yes it is known tactics from scammers to ask people for money upfront, like i said to him.
There is absolutely no proof that: 1) The victim's case is valid. 2) The money request was made by them (email sender field is relatively trivial to spoof).
Therefore, there is no proof that they are scammers either. Avoid making sudden decisions when trying to be a vigilante even if you have the sincerest intentions. One doesn't really learn this until they get burned by it.  |
|
|
|
So why would anyone even bother playing your silly little game, jumping through hoops for you?
There's absolutely no reason for me to confirm nor deny this, nor will I do so when Quicksie comes up with the next grand plan of damaging my reputation. That's because it's a stupid accusation to begin with--you never gave any evidence to the claim that Lauda could refute.
It's a bad joke at best; regardless of this being true or not none of these claimed 3rd parties that have "access to me-me" (which is an outright lie as no such person exists excl. my husband ofc.) could prove/disprove anything. |
|
|
|
qwk I ask you again to stop feeding these nutjob-trolls and bringing this thread up on my watchlist when there is nothing worth reading. Thanks.
You just can't get yourself to click the little "unwatch" button up right, can you? Addictive, is it not?  I can not do that!  I still want to read constructive input on the matter and have to keep up to speed unless you want another "Lauda abusing trust - will not remove negative from VIP member w/e" thread. -snip-
Your post only highlights that he has negative trust because of his stance on the trust system.
Wrong. People who have something to hide as is the case with this "VIP Member" should do the rational thing and stay under the radar. When there is a new user voicing any kind of opinion in many of these disputes of course they are going to be looked into. This is how many people get extra tags as DT members can not be everywhere at all times. -snip-
I was told by a reliable source who wished to remain unnamed that lauda has a pill addiction. This person knows because he was told by people who are in a position to know and are to have said they have direct knowledge (IIRC)
If I state that I was told by a reliable source who is close to the original member and wishes to remain unnamed that the VIP account has been compromised, would that be sufficient for these "methods of proof"? Bonus points for this "proof": If it turns out to be fake, I can always shift the blame on the "person who was in the position to know" and claim that he/she lied [to me]. * Lauda facepalms due to the monkey's stupidity. |
|
|
|
I would point out that if you are going to accuse someone of something, the burden is on you to prove that you are correct. The burden is not on the person to prove you are wrong
Is that so? Hypocrite scammers everywhere.
qwk I ask you again to stop feeding these nutjob-trolls and bringing this thread up on my watchlist when there is nothing worth reading. Thanks. |
|
|
|
An internet forum is not a nation-state, and an account on one is not a life, therefore losing an account is not a death sentence. Rather, it is a mere dismissal from a private organisation which you never had any particular right to be a part of in the first place.
This. There are way too many self-entitled people abusing this forum in every concievable way and then blaming others once their abuse is followed by consequences. Watch the gang swarm in......
Wait, I'm confused. Are we the merit gang or the Lauda gang?  FTFY, and yes it is the later. |
|
|
|
Again, let's assume he's still the same person.
We're now led to believe that this tech-savvy nerd who regularly used cryptographic tools in the past to conduct business on bitcoin-otc and who had a substantial amount of bitcoins did not keep a single backup of his private keys, be they pgp or bitcoin, but a single lousy hard drive that failed due to a power-outage in 2016.
I find that very hard to believe.
-snip-
No way; once you really get into all of this then the thought of losing all of your keys is probably your biggest nightmare. I know people that keep backups of backups of backups of PGP keys that expired ages ago ("just in case"). If he had private keys on a hard drive that failed due to a power outage, those keys are not lost.
As a tech-savvy guy, he must have known this.
Those keys are most likely recoverable for a couple hundred bucks.
I would say that at least some are recoverable in 99% cases; data stored on HDD should not (not can not) be damaged by power loss (e.g. unless you are working with all of that data at the exact same time). If you do that, and it turns out you're really BTC_Bear, show me the receipt of the data recovery service, and I'll cover your costs.
That's very generous; but I'm expecting an answer in the form of: "I threw it away; who needs keys anyways". Being a nerd, knowing this, he would never, ever have thrown that hard drive away.
|
|
|
|
The title says it all, a few users decide the life of any account they don't like.
Define "life of any account". The user is the sole decider of an account's fate; what many fail to realize growing up is that you are responsible for every one of your actions (which always have consequences). I wonder how is this dofferent from communism or other dictatorial regimes.
Not sure if serious or trolling. That is why bitcoin isn't working and won't unless these abusers will have nothing to do with it.
Facepalm. |
|
|
|
DarkStar opens a channel to one of the most well-connected nodes with a maximum amount of BTC per channel (~0.16 BTC).
Workaround: open e.g. 10 channels to the most connected node -> you have 10x capacity. -snip-
The limit increases with time and stability. It used to be aroind 0.03 btc, now its higher.
It's about software maturity. If you really wanted to do it, you could lift this limit right now. Anyone posting in this thread while being part of any of my campaigns below this post will be removed without notice or payment.
Just don't count it at all (only relevant for people in PPP campaigns); don't kick people out if it is on-topic/non-trolling. |
|
|
|
If you develop a script sufficient enough that can properly post and submit google forms, then this amount of accounts is trivial. Such a script doesn't even require extensive scripting knowledge,
All of those accounts are full of social media bounty reports. Therefore each of the post requires manual post. I am not a huge knowledgeable what you have mentioned but those script can't collect what they have shared or liked on facebook and organize them into a presentable data. Well, it's my opinion only from my knowledge. Of course they can; please don't spread nonsense. You can (almost) automate everything given enough time and skill. Stuff like organizing data is really easy to do as long as you have a predefined set of string possibilities that you might get (i.e. not a crazy amount of edge-cases). |
|
|
|
It has been on my TODO list ever since I have seen the thread. SoonTM.
I know you will of course think before tagging those accounts since you know it's not possible for a man to maintain such huge numbers of accounts. QuickSeller made a good point but the fact is that why someone will buy some coins which don't have any value. If you develop a script sufficient enough that can properly post and submit google forms, then this amount of accounts is trivial. Such a script doesn't even require extensive scripting knowledge, but rather a lot of trial and error (as you've likely never done something so idiotic before). |
|
|
|
Quick question— is it possible that someone is buying up all the ERC 20 coins from the people on your list?
and what's the point of buying tokens that cost nothing? Other than fraudulently claiming that the accounts aren't yours, nothing. I believe that all these accounts deserve to negative trust. What do You think, Lauda? It has been on my TODO list ever since I have seen the thread. Soon TM. |
|
|
|
>Posts snark in lieu of a logical argument
>Complains about snark in lieu of a logical argument
Dude. I'm pointing out that the system was initially designed to be open to interpretation. You're saying it needs to be changed. OK, so changed to _what_ exactly, and on _who's_ authority? You've probably stated your case a hundred times, and nobody cares. Its because you want it changed to what _you_ want. You're like a child who throws a temper tantrum when they can't have their way.
There's a simple solution to this: ~TECSHARE and place him on ignore like I did. If you re-read my previous interaction with him here, then you can clearly see that he is either full-delusional or has some strong hidden agenda (and no, KingFool this isn't a fallacy). The thread is moving in the wrong direction because of stuff like this. |
|
|
|
Quick question— is it possible that someone is buying up all the ERC 20 coins from the people on your list?
and what's the point of buying tokens that cost nothing? Other than fraudulently claiming that the accounts aren't yours, nothing. |
|
|
|
As a main character, Im glad you appreciate what I made.
I believe that I've been the main character in Meta and Reputation for the last couple of years.  I don't think it can have a higher resolution, the raw video itself that I used is 420p('The One' clip).
I was referring to future work. |
|
|
|
- Your total sent ratings is limited to three times your activity, but at least 1.
Pro: New accounts can't go on insane spam trips. Con: Could hit rating. ~2100*3 = 6300. I'm at ~4k sent now.  That's obviously a real problem. A limit tied to activity will prevent "youngsters" from becoming spam cops. I guess theymos should be able to apply a manual override of the limitations when needed, though. I think the limit is fair enough for newcommers (unless of course they are "new" with an alt account). You really won't end up tagging activityInOneYear * 3 users so quickly. This is ~1.7k characters.  Maybe add another step (e.g. after X rank and Y merit increase limit to 4-5k characters). If this isn't changed, then simply start a locked thread in archival where you post the list of linked accounts and include a link to relevant post in the feedback. In my experience describing it in the format that I've quoted is much better. We already link to the reference post or thread; if this remains unchanged then there will be somewhat of a generalization of abuse (e.g. "many alt accounts" for users that used 30 and those that used 60 - which is twice the abuse). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
