Money raised from these fines could be donated to charity or otherwise put back into the economy.

The goal would not be to raise money, it would be to deter unwanted behavior.

Your reply was in no way on topic of that thread. It was also not responding to what was said about you.

Oh, I had no idea they were one and the same.

In that case,

This is outside of current forum policy, however I believe paying this kind of bounty would be a good way to ensure rules are not broken in the future by this person. This statement is based in part by the fact that users who are perma banned may simply ignore ban evasion rules and create a new account that may or may not get detected, and may or may not be detectable by the admins.

If someone is caught engaging in copy/paste spam, and has 10 accounts, 9 of which did not do this, all 10 would need to pay the bounty to get unbanned, or some of them could pay to unlock only those accounts.

I would argue that a $100 fine would be a bigger deterrent than being banished, especially considering that the later is more difficult to enforce.  

None of the above is an endorsement of any of what the OP does.

I don't see a Farsi thread in the other languages board on the first two pages which goes back to February.

I don't think there is demand for this.

They were there as part of a months long human trafficking investigation. Regardless, being critical of the president is not a safe harbor to break the law

Sadly this is just one more way ICOs have perverted incentives related to the forum. I don’t see tagging him really doing anything. Technically speaking he could claim that any posts he made were the result of him actually wanting to post there.

TF knows enough to not ask for money via his TF account. I don’t think anyone would give him money anyway, at least not anything substantial.

The above won’t stop him from collecting money from others unfortunately. See the hashie scam that he has been accused of being behind. I doubt he is the only one who can pull off these kinds of scams. It just highlights the importance of performing due diligence prior to trusting your money with others.

IDK why, but that looks a lot like a hat that would belong to you.

Are you trying to throw your hat into the ring?

Undercover police offers witnessed her feeling up customers and when the cops approached her she felt them up too.

If you have people paying to be touched in a sexual way which is ultimately what you are doing when a performer is touching a patron at a strip club, you have what is very close to prostitution if not outright prostitution, depending on the circumstances and the legislature probably didn’t want a loophole for prostitution. With prostitution, there is the risk of human trafficking being involved and/or other forms of coercion, hence the police investigation.

I am not familiar with OH laws, however I would say it is a safe bet the provision was put in that law to avoid it conflicting with another law.

The law was also apparently back by Christian conservatives, who presumably to prevent non-married people from touching eachother in these clubs.
yup. 

The US is a county of laws, and as long as a law is in effect, and does not conflict with a law passed by a higher authority (eg., a local ordinance conflicting with a state law), you must follow the law or be at risk of facing the consequences prescribed in the law.

The law was passed by elected officials who were duly elected, so it is arguably fair to say the law is part of the will of the people.

In general, I do not like government regulations, however simply ignoring a regulation is not the answer, the solution to regulations is to persuade the government to change/remove said regulations either via elections or via petitioning the government to do so. If you fall under the jurisdiction of a regulator, and ignore their regulations, you will almost certainly face consequences.

I would also point out that the police being at the club was apparently part of a long term sex trafficking investigation.


Yes, it seems as if a single word in the statute allowed Stormy to get out of the charges. My reading of the law is that if she had fondled the patrons on the 2nd night she was scheduled at the club, she would have been found guilty. Although considering the law does not specify the "employee" needs to perform at the same establishment "repeatedly" it is arguable she would be found guilty if it was determined she had performed in multiple clubs in OH under the court's jurisdiction, which I believe to be the case. Perhaps the DA didn't want to have to deal with the BS from her lawyer who likes to try cases on friendly cable TV stations.

Initial reports were that stormy had allowed a patron to touch her.

A spouse is a person's family member. Having your spouse touch you is not weird to everyone... 

That percentage is unlikely to be only nuked accounts however nuked accounts likely make up a decent chunk of “brand new” accounts.

I suspect that a very large percentage of those accounts are inaccessible to their owner for one reason or another. If someone is proxy banned they may create a new account on a different IP instead of paying the fee, someone might have forgotten their password and just created a new account.

Right. Being a political actor does not and should not give you safe harbor to break the law.

It also seems both her and her lawyer appear to be leveraging their anti-trump stance and what is likely a bogus story for their own personal financial gain.

I would be willing to bet this is some kind of bot using not very good AI. Both posts very broadly match the topic of the thread but are outright incoherent.

For example having a toothache does make people not happy and does cause pain. Using basic logic would imply that therefore not having a toothache (the opposite of having a toothache) would cause someone to be happy (the opposite of being not happy).

If you think an actual person wrote this then you believe that someone who is illiterate was able to sign up for bitcointalk and figure out how to join a bounty campaign. I don’t think any translation service would screw things up this badly.

This may be the result of needing more board specific mods in certain boards. It may also be the result of certain mods declining to handle certain reports for one reason or another -- perhaps because they do not have time to investigate a report, because they do not agree with/understand an underlying rule, there is some conflict of interest, or some other reason.

That is ridiculous. Courts have a standard practice against punishing people for crimes, including murder under similar logic - this includes refraining from finding guilt under these circumstances.


More ridiculousness. Privacy and the right to anonymity is a fundamental right protected by the US constitution and is a valued ethos of the forum. The overwhelming majority of people that conduct any kind of business on the forum conceal their identities (those who do not conduct business have an even greater percentage of anonymity), including those with significant trust and authority. Even the mods, including the global mods are allowed to keep their identity secret from even the administration, even if this means they can conceal income and assets so they can continue to receive welfare transfer payments from the government.

According to her dirtbag lawyer, Michael Avenatti, Stephanie Clifford, whose "professional" name (the name she is known as in porn movies, strip clubs, and CNN) is Stormy Daniels was arrested in an Ohio strip club for allowing a patron touch her, which is illegal under OH statutes.

If the allegation is true, should Daniels be given a 'free pass' because she and her lawyer are vocal in trying to spew dirt on President Trump? Or should she face the consequences of her actions like anyone else in her situation would have to?

edit/correction: the actual reason she was arrested was because she touched a patron at the club where she was performing. Her lawyer did in fact say (inaccurately) that she was arrested for allowing a patron to touch her.

In general, all Global mods do is help the moderators handling reports. Some global mods will also help with administrative duties such as temp bans, account recoveries and the like.

If there are sufficient section moderators, having additional global mods will not be necessary.