Hmm. I have some Azbit tokens that are still frozen. As far as I know, the ICO is still ongoing until June 30. Is this a Scam? We need stronger evidence.
They have changed contracts 3 times: 0xeccab39acb2caf9adba72c1cb92fdc106b993e0b 0x77fe30b2cf39245267c0a5084b66a560f1cf9e1f 0xaaaaaaaba2ea3daab0a6c05f1b962c78c9836d99 and still don't know which fucking one is real 😡 still can't able to move that shit. waste of gas fee😡 appears to be the only one with a real Azbit logo and 300K addresses;. |
|
|
|
Interestingly they will try to resolve the situation after you contact them, what they have done so far, hoped that no one will ask where is our hard earned money? I am particularly interested in this case because I promoted them in signature campaign, so some of people who are not get pay for bounty are probably participate via my signature.
Any new information is welcome.
I'm currently not home much so a bit slow with the responses. I sent a message to Edward for some clarification but it saved as a draft rather than get sent. (I didn't notice earlier) I re-sent it yesterday so he has not yet had much time to respond. I know from my previous dealings with them that they are not much on bitcointalk and entrusted their dealing on bitcointalk to a community manager. I found them to be transparent and easy to deal with when I dealt with them when the initial accusations were made towards BQT and IOU The community manager has not been online since May.  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2015835EDIT: I haven't paid much attention to BQT or IOU since the last issues so I am still getting familiar with the issues surrounding the signature bounty campaign. I notice that Zapos second to last post was in October. (Last post about BQT)  http://archive.fo/DH7x2 |
|
|
|
I will not remove people I trust in my list in real life ok ? Banned or not . I do not care.
It's not my problem that banned people appear on my list as BANNED. If this is a problem that mean bitcointalk.org forum system is a problem.
Forum system can remove banned users completely in database. So they don't appear on anybody's list forever.
But bitcointalk.org didn't choose that.
To be DT member is a award from the community to me. And they can take it back any time they want.
The only thing i won't do; To be involved in various strategic games.
Sometimes people you like in real life are not suitable to carry the responsibility that forum trust requires. I removed a number of people from my trust list that I trust on other platforms but that either broke the rules on here or do not show the responsibility that being on DT requires. If someone is banned it shows that they were not prepared to follow the forum rules and most often that is either for spamming or plagiarism. I'm reluctant to exclude people from DT unless they show they are not up to the task by giving questionable feedback. More DT's hopefully makes the forum trust system more robust. It is nice to see some new Turkish DTs. Forum bans are separate from trust issues but I recommend that you re-assess your stance on keeping people on your trust list that have a negative impact on the forum. It shows that you take the forum rules and etiquette seriously and are prepared to hold people accountable - including your friends. |
|
|
|
I'm quite certain TMAN ended up on theymos' shitlist during the Russian debacle. Yes that is correct. After that TMan changed his position on the issue but remained on Theymos list. |
|
|
|
Just block those websites on your PC On windows: 1: Open Windows Explorer and go to C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc 2: Double-click hosts, and select Notepad 3: Go to the last line 4:Type 127.0.0.1 + website you want to block e.g. 127.0.0.1 bitcointalk.com 127.0.0.1 bitcointalk.to 127.0.0.1 thebitcointalk.net On linux 1. open the /etc/hosts file with your text editor and add: 127.0.0.1 bitcointalk.com 127.0.0.1 bitcointalk.to 127.0.0.1 thebitcointalk.net Source / more info: https://support.rackspace.com/how-to/modify-your-hosts-file/This way you can never accidentally visit the wrong site. The domain will resolve to localhost. |
|
|
|
I have seen some very informative posts from highly intelligent individuals that are articulate, polite and come across as valued members of this community but they are not DT1.
On the other side, I have seen far more users that have been around for years and are DT1 but they bring literally nothing of substance to the community.
With regards to the heading title of this thread: "DT1 with zero or neutral trust", I think a better solution is needed to ensure some degree of accountability on part of those that are DT1 and also a different mechanism in place for others to be able to achieve DT1 level.
Posts really have very little to do with DT status. If someone is eligible for DT then it becomes dependent on how many DT1 trust them and how many distrust them. Some of it will be forum politics, perception or opinion that determines whether someone is trusted or distrusted. This is why the voting system is good. If a member has more trust than distrust then they still are a valid DT. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;dtviewSome former DT1 and 2 have deliberately removed themselves from being eligible for DT selection because they disagree with the current system or are just sick of the bickering and negativity that tends to happen when you are on DT. It is very hard to determining someones "value" to the community. For instance there are a lot of members that post very little but help out with investigations, report spammers and report rule breakers or post on sections of the forum that you might not visit. When the merit system was introduced I noticed some people were merited a lot that I had never heard of before. They tended to post in sections of the forum that I never visit. |
|
|
|
|
I use purely selfish reasoning for adding people to my trust list. The core criteria being - do I want to see their opinions ?
1) The criteria that I use is "do I trust their judgement" ? I look at the people they tag, their posts on the forum and who they associate with.
While it doesn't make it perfect - it is a good guide.
2) More is better. Unless someone is consistently wrong it is better to get a warning and ignore it than to get no warning and deal with a scammer.
If you get a warning you have the choice to ignore it. For instance - people may have done something dodgy but it doesn't necessarily make the untrustworthy in every way.
For this reason I've left default trust on - but have a custom list. If I find a particular member makes consistent unreliable decisions or appears dodgy I exclude them but have DT1 and 2 included by default.
|
|
|
|
With the earlier accusation I spoke to the CEO (Edward) of BQT who was listed as an adviser on the IOU team - they appeared quite genuine. I'll send him an email and ask for a response. There may be a genuine reason. EDIT: The CEO Edward Mandel has responded back to me and discussed the situation. At this stage I don't have much to report back other than they are looking at resolving it. |
|
|
|
Some Trust Selfscratchers create their own positive trust once they're on DT1.
It's far from perfect, but the volatility of DT makes that Trust ratings can change any moment. That makes it a bad criterion to use.
I agree that it would just encourage trust rating abuse. People are already reluctant to give trading ratings due to perceived and actual abuse. Trading is not monitored like on ebay so there is no real record of it other than what is posted. None of the trades I have completed on the forum resulted in feedback - trading feedback has all come from trades on other platforms. |
|
|
|
Yes I am now up to 3 retaliatory trust feedbacks from him.
Will probably be more later today after I add my negative trust to him.
Do you think this warrants a thread someplace other then the reputation forum to get more mods attention? He rally needs a perma ban or as eaLiTy put it "get him added to the deleted profile list"
Other then theymos should we be pining out to other people about it?
I really don't want to poke theymos as he has better things to do with his time.
-Dave
He is just a dickhead. He is doing more harm to himself than others by placing his feedback. 1) His feedback is total nonsense that makes him look like a loony. 2) More people read the feedback of the people he placed feedback on than read his feedback so more people will realize he is an idiot from reading the feedback he placed on others than from the feedback placed on him. 3) His feedback is un-trusted so doesn't show by default. Leaving fake feedback now put him in the top spot of least trusted member on bitcointalk. What a winner.   https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=leasttrusted |
|
|
|
|
I feel like such a loser. I didn't even get a dishonorable mention.
|
|
|
|
None of the below listed bitcointalk accounts ever used Game Protect and therefore can not give a feedback based on facts!  How would you know ? You have only listed usernames. How would you know if they used a different username at casinos or using your "service" ? |
|
|
|
If you are interested in Bitcoin, ofc it is super cool to have a legendary account in this forum.
This forum has a lot of history. Being someone who is contributing to the forum, participating in discussions, helping newbies and learning is interesting. Becoming a legendary is like leveling up . I wanna get there.
as I read in xtraelv signature"we are surrounded by legends here"
If you are just interested in bounties, it is also useful because you will get higher payout... But I believe that in a few months /years legendary spammers will be worthless accounts.
The reference to legends doesn't just refer to legendary accounts. It refers to people who have contributed to the crypto community in various ways. There are bitcoin heros on this forum like Satoshi, Theymos, Hal Finney, Adam Beck etc. As well as various villains like Alexander Vinnick, Ross Ulbricht, Michael Brown etc as well as people who are still making history. |
|
|
|
Tether now surpasses Bitcoin in market volume trade.
It means that if we don't take money traded in USDT in to account for total daily trading volume of bitcoin, bitcoin domination is much lower than what the domination of bitcoin presented on Coinmarketcap.com. It is just my guess, and not sure my thought is right. How do you think about this? It shows that there is still a lot of reliance and speculation against the US$ without converting it to actual $. Another thing it proves is that people are unperturbed by the lack of $ backing of the USDT The fluctuations of bitcoin valued in US$ still make it difficult for commerce. It also means people are using USDT to hedge against other crypto like Ripple, LTC and ETH without converting it to bitcoin first. |
|
|
|
Here is an example posted in a support ticket: We agreed I pay you after the court. I also read a lot of negative things about game protect (he refers to bitcointalk.org). I do not care if I threw away the 4,5k. If you are making problems about the 1k then do not investigate it anymore and our coorporation will end here. bye It appears that his clients struggle with grammar and spelling the same way that game-protect does. It is like it was written by the same person. |
|
|
|
Who did my lottery scam and for how much?
Perhaps you can tell us. Surely you must know. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
