It is effectively trying to outlaw the use of Airplanes (no fossil fuels after 10 years).

Trump seems to think AOC and democrats should move forward with the Green New Deal

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1094375749279248385

If there is evidence of this, articles of impeachment will probably get filed, and the democratic congress would probably impeach if the articles said he was driving 1 MPH over the speed limit, even though Trump doesn't drive. I would suspect Trump would release information regarding his campaign being spied on by the Obama administration not long after evidence that he ordered the CIA to hack Bezos' phone, which will probably mean he survives (I wouldn't necessarily continue to support him, but that is my prediction).

The "rumors" are actually Bezos' head of security (who is investigating the hacking) saying he believes this may have happened. I would note The Washington Post (wholly owned by Bezos) has gotten many stories wrong about Trump, and have been so wrong that months after the fact, I suspect they were made up to make him look bad. WaPo is so anti-trump that one of their editorial writers blamed Trump on one of the hurricanes last year. It has been claimed Bezos lets WaPo have editorial independence, but I don't believe it.

IIRC, the head of security for Bezos previously though the brother of Bezos' mistress was the one who leaked the texts (he denied it), and has not proffered anyone else who might be responsible; in essence he said "it is either her older brother, or Big Brother"
This really depends on the details of how the texts were stolen/the phone was hacked. If the actual phone was hacked, encryption would not do anything because the hacker could obtain the decryption key when it is in the phone's RAM, which would be as frequent as the phone reads/accesses text messages. If the texts were intercepted between the two phones (eg via cell towers), then maybe encryption would have protected him, although I understand iMessage uses encryption the government was unable to break as of 2015. I am not sure if Bezos and his mistress were using iMessage or not.

This would be the same as bumping 100-1000x per day, which is disallowed. It would also be the same as having a bot that bumps with the same frequency, making having the multiple bots pointless.

You have acknowledged your dox, and have posted your dox within your posting history, and as such (to the extent information is found within your posting history), posting your dox is allowed, even with the new rules. If you are reporting posts with this information, you either do not understand the rules, do not care about the rules, or are trying to cause problems for people that do not like you.


In the case of this thread, the OP got his information from a zero post newbie account, and I got my information from someone who I have reason to trust, and have reason to believe. The OP has not described what he asked his source, while I have explained how specifically my source claims to know the information provided to me.

The above is a distinction you either have not noticed, or more likely do not care about and have ignored.

The problems with the trust system started when threads complaining about DT ratings were moved from Meta to Reputation, which coincided with when DT ratings effectively stopped being both moderated and mediated by the administration and forum. This allowed complaints about trust ratings to go ignored, and those who left questionable ratings were no longer forced to defend their ratings, and ultimately has lead to complaints about ratings being answered with cat pictures and other trolling.

The trust system got much worse (and if the above alone happened, it probably would not have gotten anywhere near as bad as it is now) when Blazed was added to DT1, and eventually added several questionable people who didn't have any business in being in any position of authority. These questionable people eventually earned reputation, conducted business successfully, and were able to "tag" enough scammers for others to trust them, however there were a lot of people "tagged" along the way who weren't by any reasonable definition a "scammer" nor could you reasonably say why they would attempt to scam in the future. IMO, adding Blazed to DT1, and more specifically/importantly, keeping him there when problems went unaddressed, was probably the single worse decision theymos has made as admin (assuming each time the forum was hacked was the result of a bad decision on his part). I can't really blame theymos for adding Blazed to DT1 in the first place, at the time he was trusted by many, had an extensive trading history, was known to be fair both when dealing with others and in his trust ratings, and was willing to take responsibility when he messed up; for the most part, this is mostly true, although he was involved in this escrow dispute in which millions of dollars were unaccounted for, although it is unclear his specific role as there were multiple escrows, perhaps the reason he escaped unscathed was the lack of public statements and transparency, which is something I find shady in-itself, but I digress. None of these reasons are enough to account for ignoring problems with his trust list.

The problem with ignoring abuses of the trust system for years, as has been done, is that once someone has been "tagged" for a long time, they cannot easily be "untagged" even if the abusers are removed from the trust system. For example, the last time Lauda was outright excluded from DT, some accounts "woke up" and when straight to the lending section to ask for a loan; most of these accounts were probably not reasonably scammers when they were tagged, and if not for the inactivity that was likely caused by the red trust, it might not be unreasonable to believe these people would repay their loans had they not just gotten their "red trust" removed. Obviously given the circumstances, they were unlikely to repay any loan they might receive, and were likely attempting to scam via taking a loan they had no intention of repaying.

The current state of the trust system does not do much in terms of protecting against scammers because the criteria that so many people use to leave negative trust spans so far beyond "tagging" because someone is a "scammer" that the value of "tagging" has become diminished. Someone could attempt to do business with someone with negative trust after reading the comment and believing it is safe to do business with the person, and end up getting scammed, and this could happen many times because the non-DT negative ratings can be chalked up to being from trolls and/or competitors, while the DT negative trust will still not explain why it is unsafe to do business with the scammer.

I have no good solution as to what to do with the trust system. Ideally, we would go back to moderately moderating the trust system, and forcing people to defend their ratings when disputed, however this would also need to involve removing many people from the trust network (see above problem). The forum is also a lot bigger than it was back then, and as such it would be difficult to suddenly accounting for all that growth in terms of the number of disputes; the trust network would also need to be bigger than it was back then, although perhaps not as big as it was immidiately prior to this thread. I don't think the new system is a good change to the trust system, nor is anything that does "not generally be trying to cultivate a good list". There does not appear to be an admin who responds to many meta threads and as such, I don't believe there is an admin who monitors all meta threads (like BadBear did). I think outright getting rid of the trust system is probably extreme.

Perhaps they were doing something similar to what they were doing in this thread.

I PM’ed him to make him aware of this post and he said he sent you a message.

I hate to burst your bubble, but you have publicly acknowledged your dox and is publicly available on your post history.

From the looks of it, the accusation in the OP is frivolous, but exposing your dox will only post what you have posted.

I would suggest that you look at the trust ratings of some of these people, including when the ratings were left, and revisit if you believe that dissent is “allowed” (effectively and without having your ability to conduct business essentially removed).

Pun intended?

I presume you are referring to putting lauda in your trust list.

I speculate these people are distrusting you because you have a known extortionist, and someone who has been unwilling to account for over a million dollars they were holding as escrow.

Perhaps you can add a ~ in front of lauda

If you received this screenshot in its redacted form from a zero post newbie, then I would suggest locking this thread. (I think this is what you are saying). You don't have any way to assess the credibility of the evidence, and the evidence is not credible. Suchmoon has denied the validity of the screenshot.

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos posted a medium blog post alleging that Trump supporter's National Enquirer attempted to extort him with the threat of publishing "dick pics" and other sexually explicit pics (likely sent to his mistress whom he was cheating on his wife with) unless Bezos uses his propaganda newspapers, The Washington Post to say that the National Enquirer was not being used for political purposes.

This comes amid the National Enquirer exposing Bezos having an affair as a married man, publishing text messages between Bezos and his mistress, and Bezos attempting to investigate how these text messages leaked.

Bezos published what he purported to be emails from various employees of the National Enquirer.

The US has been alleging that Russia has not been keeping up with this treaty for a long time.

A zero post newbie is begging you to remove the screenshot for one of three reasons:

• Someone thinks the screenshot might be real and wants to protect suchmoon
• Someone wants to make suchmoon look bad
• Someone wants to create more drama

What ultimately matters is if the screenshot is real.

The issue is not what is in your PM inbox, the question is if the person who sent you the screenshot has a PM from Suchmoon similar to what the screenshot says.

I would say that I believe you have a PM with that screenshot in your inbox. What I think is less likely is that someone received a PM similar to what the screenshot shows.

It looks like suchmoon has denied the allegations, so the OP needs to provide actual proof, similar to what others (and myself) have suggested.

If this is fake, and so far, all signs point in that direction, this will be harmful to the community and will only make it easier for someone in a similar situation to scam in the future as these frivolous claims cause future claims to be taken less seriously. 

Is this persons description of how he spends his day and how he interacts with people on the internet not exactly how lauda does the same?

This goes to show how much certain people want power.

You wouldn’t be the first to offer this kind of service.

This is not disallowed and falls within the rules to the extent there are no duplicate bumps and no more than one bump every 24 hours.

I would actually suggest bumping every 27-28 hours so that different time zones will see the thread at the top over time.

I am not sure if you are serious or not. The Axis quite literally controlled all of Europe except for England in WW2 prior to D-Day, which wouldn’t have been possible without American troops and resources. The allies again in WW1 didn’t have victory in sight until the surge of American troops.

Perhaps your revisionist view is the result of hatred of America and desire of liberalism.

The socialist countries you speak of have national defense subsidized by the rest of the world, namely the US. The same can be said of healthcare as these countries pay much less for medicines and medical treatment than the rest of the world, meaning recouping investment in creating the drugs must come from elsewhere.