What do you mean they are not valid?
All of those feedbacks are coming from DT members that don't trust you including global mod hilariousandco, and I see that you (or original Maidak) was selling forum account back in March of this year.
Account ownership quite obviously changed in April of this year - it went from fluent English to a heavy accent. Post the proof of what you worked, what you delivered. If you fail to provide any single ounce of evidence against me then I will create a flag and I don't care if any fucking numbnut SuchDickSucker has your back or not I will fucking create that flag and won't care if anyone supports it.
Two things can be true at once. Both of you can be full of shit at the same time. You haven't provided any evidence of you bullshit either, and you have admitted to many things that make you extremely untrustworthy. Like: Regardless. My account was hacked into. Some of the priv keys were compromised. I will secure my account by staking another wallet. You, can go fuck off.
You can't possibly prove that you're the original owner of this account and you can't possibly prove that your account was ever hacked. You might have dug your hole just a tad too deep here. |
|
|
|
If you cannot follow that simple train of logic then you don't have any business replying here.
I'm following your "train" quite well so far. You keep passwords and even private keys in e-mail. Your e-mail got hacked. You can't be trusted. Choo-choo. I don't give a rat's ass to what happens to Maidak's account. All I know he's threatening to create a flag against me in my inbox trying to extort money from me like numerous other lackeys on this forum have tried before. Whom you've gallantly supported as well, I remember how well you were sucking up to that kabit / Kunal madarchod when he was abusing my parents. I know the kind of sick filthy individual you are. I don't need any justification for that. But don't for a moment come to my threads and pretend you have any authority over me. Or pass a judgement that I should pay up to people whom I've never interreacted with before in my life.
If your story checks out and if Maidak was indeed scammed by someone using your Bitcointalk account then your Bitcointalk account should be tagged and flagged regardless of your attempts to play the victim here. It is clearly dangerous for anyone to deal with your Bitcointalk account if even the private key associated with your staked address was compromised. Unless Maidak failed to verify your identity, e.g. via signed message, in which case you might get tagged and flagged slightly less than you really deserve. |
|
|
|
What is funny is how depraving your mental conditioning must be to assume that I've just left out all my emails unattended for the hack that happened in April to which I was alerted and aware of within an hour (see the screenshot above).
This is the primary email that I used for most of my backups including this account. And I was stupid enough to have saved some private keys in the drafts along with some other passwords.
Your "explanation" just a few posts back was that you save private keys and passwords in e-mail drafts. Once again, you're either lying or you're extremely careless. So spare me the high and mighty act. I am a telegram moderator / community manager and have been so since 2019. I get impersonated 20 times a day for every project that I'm involved with. How the fuck am I supposed to track that shit? Or find out who's impersonating me?
I got 2 messages in my inbox and I made a post about them to stay in the clear.
You got hacked months ago, and you get impersonated 20 times a day, but when you see two unrecognized messages in your inbox all you can think of is that the other guy is hacked. Totally legit  |
|
|
|
~
WTF indeed. You know you've been compromised but when you see weird PMs your first thought is that someone else's account is compromised? Massive logic fail. Stop posting nonsense and secure your shit. Since when did SuchMoon become SuchShitTalker? I've posted a screenshot of how there's been a number of password resets during April for Maidak's account. Coincidently the same time when my email was hacked as well. Again - assuming you're not lying about the hack, which is not a fact - you know your e-mails have been compromised for months, and you just go ahead and accuse someone else instead of trying to figure out perhaps if someone was impersonating you. That's quite ludicrous even for a belligerent multiposting blowhard like you so congratulations on besting yourself at pointless drama. |
|
|
|
LoyceV's and TryNinja's bots are reliable source unless they have a way to edit the post content. I have never heard any complaints that might be the case though.
Of course they can modify the archived posts at any time. I'm quite sure LoyceV has removed or edited some doxing attempts once or twice. But they're staking their reputation on it and we can trust that they wouldn't do it for malicious purposes about as much as we trust them not to scam or otherwise deceive in general. (the following is not necessarily in response to you but on the topic of the thread in general) I do trust both TryNinja and LoyceV but I would still argue that moderators should not use those archives to ban users, particularly if the ban reason itself no longer exists in this forum (the post has been edited by the author). Imagine this scenario: 1) I make a copy-pasta post, forget to add a link, edit the post 10 seconds later and add the link. LoyceV's archive has my original without the link. 2) I edit the post a year later for an unrelated reason. Some shithead finds the archive and reports it for plagiarism. My last edit date makes it look like I made the edit recently and the plagiarism existed for a year. Archives don't really capture every edit to show what actually happened. Do we really want to go that far into the weeds? For what purpose? To catch one or two more plagiarists? There is always many others we can find with far less effort. And if we ever get to the point where the few sleazeballs who edited their posts after being reported are the only shitposters on this forum, I think we'll be fine. |
|
|
|
How did you log in of their was a password change?
He reset the password today. The bigger question is - like LoyceV mentioned - how did the "hacker" access the account without resetting the password, and why did the presumably real legendster needed to reset it if... I already have a strong password. Always did.
|
|
|
|
Is there anything in your PM or outbox? Of course that could have been deleted so you can't know for sure.
[...]
I assume you're the one who reset it, but doesn't that mean the attacker must have entered your old password in order to change it?
Based on legenster's weird-ass accusation against Maidak, which he posted after he created this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5359785There is a non-negligible chance that he tried to scam Maidak and is now trying to pretend that he was hacked. |
|
|
|
~
WTF indeed. You know you've been compromised but when you see weird PMs your first thought is that someone else's account is compromised? Massive logic fail. Stop posting nonsense and secure your shit. |
|
|
|
Chubb's doing his thing.... I still have hope. Danm, now the Niners seem to be doing everything they can to lose this game after scoring 41 points. WTF! Picking up Goff doesn't seem so crazy now.
Let's be fair, Lions cashed out all their luck on those two 2-pointers and that onside kick. |
|
|
|
Do quotes of plagiarized content count?
Assume someone posted something stolen from the Internet and later deleted it or edited it with a link. Another user quoted that post before changes were made. Can it be used as evidence of plagiarism? It is true that quotes can be freely modified by the person quoting the post, but when combined with the archived unedited version, it gives even more evidence of plagiarism.
No. There is no "official" archive of the forum and in any case, if someone fucks up but fixes it later you can no longer claim that their intent was to plagiarize. And the second question: Everything on the forum is archived, why the user remains unpunished in case of obvious plagiarism and further editing? I mean after it became known to the public. Does it change something?
No it doesn't. If it did no one would ever be banned for plagiarism, they simply connect to a notifier like TryNinja's telegram bot and check for quotes and mentions for accusation of plagiarism, then quickly add a source link before mods take action. Don't post the findings publicly then. Report to mods. from my perspective anyone that's caught for plagiarism and at the period of been caught the user began to edit and add source, let the user face the penalty of plagiarism, it's absolutely wrong and if an adequate measure is not taken it will create a means to plagarise and edit when caught and definitely it will become norms of the forum.
So what? They fixed it, it's no longer plagiarism. But when someone edit their Post after getting caught then they may deserve ban for sure.
No. Just no.
The goal should be reducing shitpostery, not banning as many users as possible. Report plagiarism to moderators but stop sweating about users editing their posts. The 1% who care enough to do that might turn out to be valuable users or they'll get caught later. |
|
|
|
|
Hmmm... maybe I should have put Deebo in flex. Oh well.
|
|
|
|
For this case, leaving a source as Google is very lazy and unacceptable (in my opinion) at least, it shows that poster does not claim the ownership of that content.
And that should be good enough for not getting banned. I want to be able to post something I read somewhere even if I can't find the link right now. Of course when you post a large amount of text that seems to be copy-pasted, and not a paraphrased sentence, you probably should have a proper link, but it still should not lead to a ban. Is it a low value post that should be deleted - perhaps, depending on circumstances. Same with editing posts. Moderators should not ban for something that no longer exists. Honestly I'm not a huge fan of posting plagiarism findings publicly (just report to mods) however there are circumstances where I could clearly see there was no intent to plagiarise but rather a mangled quote, or a copy of a well-known text that moderators may interpret as an attempt to claim as your own, so I would warn the poster that they should edit it to clarify the source. Let's face it, real plagiarists will get caught eventually anyway. Banning slightly careless users is not necessary. |
|
|
|
|
Bucs were far from favorites at the start of the last season. It wasn't until about 10 games in that I started paying attention to them and if I recall correctly, even in the playoffs bookies still favored Saints to win the conference. Bucs peaked at a perfect time. I don't think this is going to work out so perfectly (underestimated by opponents, minimal injuries, etc) for them this year, but they do have one of the easiest schedules in the league. Well, allegedly. Cowboys were supposed to be easy.
Speaking of Saints, apparently they're playing against Packers this weekend... in Jacksonville. This is gonna be a tough year for them.
|
|
|
|
Yikes, slap on that tin foil hat--but I guess that's what Off-Topic is for, right? That's Politics&Society, and BADecker does that day in and day out - copy-pastes a title, adds a link, starts a new thread even it's mostly the same topic as many of his other threads. Spammy AF. Most of the time though he adds a quote and perhaps a sentence of his own so technically it's difficult to argue on the grounds of "low value". But in this case he didn't even bother to do that, still apparently it's good enough effort for a discussion forum despite being lifted verbatim from some blog or e-mail newsletter. I thought it's gonna be a slam dunk report. Nope, dude's got shitposting immunity of some sort. SMH. |
|
|
|
300 grand for a Volvo sounds like a scam. I wouldn't pay either. |
|
|
|
Most people who feel animosity to anything which threatens the elite have the pathetic notion that they are in this group, or at least favored by them. I'll bet that the elite's disdain for such dick-eaters is exceeds whatever they might feel toward the populists class of useless eaters by a mile. I'm not surprised in the least to see your attitude about that here.
As opposed to what, believing that a dictator will care about anyone's interests beyond their own? I'll take voting for someone/something and ending up with it not being 100% aligned with my interests, over anointing someone to rule with no accountability. But to each their own. |
|
|
|
|
Sounds like an extortion racket more than anything else. There is no clear definition given as to what the OP will consider "plagiarism", and knowing that OP's report led to someone getting incorrectly banned, this doesn't sound like a valid wager. I would hope none of the reputable escrows would agree to it either.
|
|
|
|
I am surprised at the number of leftists I see on the forum. I mean people who in general believe that the state is the best guarantor of the progress of society, rather than being the particular decisions of individuals, which would be a more capitalist conception.
Except many if not most of the self-proclaimed right-wing individual-liberty champions on this forum have varying degrees of autocratic and populist leanings, cheering hardliners like the ones mentioned in the quote you posted (Bolsonaro and Bukele). That's a far more bizarre thing for me to reconcile. Supporting strongman politics just because it aligns with my views... no, thank you. Been there, seen that, doesn't end well. I don't like the government getting into my business but I dislike random populist bullshit even more. (edited for clarity) |
|
|
|
That would be very obvious Trust abuse. (~~~) You are incapable of defending yourself, which is why you attack those who accuse you of plagiarism.Stop deflecting, address your problems head on. It's the only way to resolve them. To me it seems like a weakness to try to defame the person who made some valid arguments. I still think the plagiarism rules should be adjusted, this shouldn't be allowed (see my reasons why). Big surprise: the guy who first posted about Ratimov's plagiarism received negative feedback the next day:  I can't help but think Ratimov was angry when he tagged those users. Here's another " brain-dead fucker". I don't know why Ratimov left them negative feedback in English, because I can't read the Russian Reference links. I see one very strong connection though: they've criticized Ratimov, so he tags them. And then you wonder why people use alt accounts? Allow me to quote myself: Be the bigger man!With great power comes great responsibility ( source unknown). Especially when you're on DefaultTrust (or if you want to be on DefaultTrust in the future), you shouldn't (ab)use that power by leaving (negative) feedback when someone does something you don't like. Your Sent feedback is what others use to judge your judgement.If someone on the internet is mean to you: boo fucking hoo! Use the Ignore button, and forget about them. Fix your fucking quote before you get banned for plagiarism. It would be immensely amusing but I'm really tired of this sockpuppeting shit-stiring drama. |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoiners buying folk wagons instead of Lambos. Bitcoin is clearly and truly dead for real this time.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
