Neither Untold nor myself have anything to do with this. Blazed and Hilarious gave Lauda the power, lauda gave his power to Atriz as support, they ran ALu and scammed me.
I have no power nor have I given any non-existing power to anyone else nor were you scammed by ALU. This is starting to get really pathetic.
You really need to stop spreading lies about me. I hereby also request the removal of the (innocent) names in the thread title. |
|
|
|
I do not have anything against you, but this just shows your double standards, Lauda! Beats the purpose of having a merit system in place if "notable" names like you are going to misuse it. I have done everything possible (ethically) to earn merits, but it just doesn't happen.
Everything written here is wrong. Nobody has an obligation to merit anyone, and it is up to them to decide how they're going to handle it. Actual abuse would be meriting your alts or selling the points. What you are complaining about has nothing to do with abuse. I am almost never giving out merit to people who need it to rank up (regardless of the "worthiness" of their post)
Exactly what I have been complaining about. There is no possible way for a full member like me to ever rank up on this forum! Shouldn't it be a task of "notable" names like you to actually merit the people who are writing "worthy" posts in order to encourage others to do the same? Shouldn't it be a task of "not-notable" names like you to pay some "notable" names like me a hourly rate of $250 to waste my life reading your shitposts in order to figure out what might be worth meriting (and thus act accordingly)? [1] Due to this self-entitled bullshit..
I called it already for what it is. The forum has unfortunately become infested with people of this type. You keep giving, and they keep asking for more without ever giving something back. Participating in the merit system in a certain way is not, and can never be an obligation.
[1] Don't get your hopes up, this is not a real question (hence the absurd h.rate) but only biased baboons could think that it is. |
|
|
|
|
This post contains so many fallacies that it is "brain-cell-damaging" to the reader. The only missing cancerous ingredient is appealing to some religious nonsense ("god shalt punish you").
I've checked out your case. This account does not belong to you, and making this appeal while being a fraud makes it even worse. I would be really surprised if OP doesn't have alt accounts.
|
|
|
|
I saw a one liner post by Lauda which received 50 merits from aTriz, a 7 word post from a user which received 5 merits from Pharmacist and innumerable other similar examples.
Almost everyone on this forum is misusing it.
You do not get to decide for others what they are going to merit, especially not for more notable names. Due to this self-entitled bullshit from account farming buffoons, I am almost never giving out merit to people who need it to rank up (regardless of the "worthiness" of their post). Also, ranking up doesn't matter to anyone who just wants to contribute to the forum. To which a lot say they do... but still complain about merit.
Evident liars. |
|
|
|
Check the updated post and stop responding so quickly (as you miss edits this way). Whoever said that pathological liars aren't aware of validity of proof.
A thief knows more about locks than the lockowner or perhaps even lockmakers.
Disagreed. When exposed, they tend to react irrationally (i.e. make mistakes)[1]. As a good example of that, take a look how Quickscammer reacted when he got exposed. He lied that he got a 2 (or 3?) day ban, which is ridiculous and as a lie absolutely stupid given that it can be trivially disproven (which it was by BadBear). 
[1] Then again, not every pathological liar is as smart as the one next to him. I can't draw to any generalizations here. |
|
|
|
-snip-
bounty managers usually have nothing to do with the project
-snip-
I dunno if it entails lying on their behalf.  It does not. However, bounty managers are not responsible for validity of information provided by others nor are they obligated to constantly check information (e.g. whitepaper validity, road-map, statements in general). However, when they are made aware of a clear lie then the obvious course of action would be to pull the plug (at least make them instantly retract and apologize; which wouldn't be adequate given the scale of the lie here). I've made my disappointment with the way that this situation was handled (before, and after the exposure) clear in here. aTriz's silence is a red flag. I'm actually liking the way this Israel styled plausible deniability debate is ON. I can't cryptographically prove that I didn't know, and you can't cryptographically prove that I did know (which is what was meant with ' objective proof'). The Quickscammer style ' friend of a friend unidentified reliable source' bullshit doesn't do it for anyone with a brain bigger than 2 peanuts.
I wonder why a "pathological liar" (according to certain baboons) would make reasonable statements regarding validity of proof.  |
|
|
|
So, in theory, it's quite possible that the entire ALU was part of aTriz's scam projects and now they are denying it to save their asses.  Yes, and no: 1) Yes, because it is not possible to provide objective proof of unawareness. 2) No, because the wording 'entire ALU' is flawed and none of those projects were aTriz's (as far as I know; bounty managers usually have nothing to do with the project in the sense that the team behind the project is not related/the same as the individual/team managing the bounty). Some people were not part of it at the time (IIRC), and community management has nothing to do with bounty management unless they directly knew about that fraudulent statement (which goes back to point 1).
It's the classic smear tactic[1], similar to the pedophile/pill addict/racist/whatever accusations. You can deny everything, but you can't prove your denial which is why usually the accuser needs to provide proof for the allegation - legally, plaintiff (which doesn't seem to be the norm when going after me).
[1] To clarify, I'm not saying you are trying to smear my name (with this post). This is a general observation/statement regarding prior (obviously lies) accusations and the way of conduct when going after me. |
|
|
|
How does one differentiate between aTriz (personal projects) and other projects (dunno what to call them; since there are no ALU projects). You can't, the same way you can't know whether the user (any other bounty manager) who posts the thread is actually managing it or whether he/she/it/they delegated it to someone for $50 per week. Not that others matter in a witch hunt, obviously. BTW since we don't have any ALU project; what is ALU...
You should ask god to enlighten you; not that the definition of that is of any concern to you. |
|
|
|
What happened to 10 weeks?
Nothing happened. Why the impatience? You're not supposed to be submitting at the start of the week anyways.
Due to a delay, that is beyond my ability, I'll be extending the entry deadline for Week 10 by 2 days (meaning, it will close on Saturday the 5th of May for the Twitter campaign).
Removed the temporary link and merged the sheets. |
|
|
|
All that matters is he is an ALU member unfortunately.
Which is completely irrelevant to this thread. Desperation is strong in you. |
|
|
|
|
He has '┌►Need Merits◄┐' as his profile text; no surprise there. He should be removed from the forum, which is a much simpler solution.
|
|
|
|
-snip-
dont be so biased here,i didnt do any violation here.
Biased? What are you even blabbering about? I'm not particularly interested in any of the shitposters listed in that rating.
Alternative solution: Hilariousandco/mprep bans all of them, ratings become irrelevant and thus removed. Win-win? |
|
|
|
Edit: And interestingly, all of the accounts I tagged are in different bounties. There's no overlap whatsoever, as if the owner of the alts was deliberately trying not to register two accounts in the same bounty. I'd also like this guy to list which accounts are his and which are not.
If there are constantly joining bounty campaigns, and there is absolutely no overlap whatsoever, then that is quite the red flag. A puppeteer who is trying hard not to get busted. |
|
|
|
And off course I have selected threads that prove my point.
The only thing that your selection proves is that you're a butthurt baboon. There is no such thing as an "ALU-project". It was solely managed by aTriz and nobody was aware of any of this. It was listed like any other project that one of us has worked on, nothing special.
There is no such "contact method". It is possible that a single project is "split-managed", i.e. that the work is divided (e.g. 1 person does the signature campaign, the other does the bounty campaign). You only get paid for the work that gets passed down to you (as mentioned). This was not the case with Bitblisscoin, as to my knowledge, he was working alone on it[1].
I've made things adequately clear. More ALU projects  ;- This time managed by ChrisBren another ALU member and the threads were created using the infamous aTriz bounty thread template. Community management has absolutely nothing to do with bounty management. Brainpower doesn't seem to be one of your traits. |
|
|
|
Still waiting for the refund from ALU
You will not be getting anything from ALU as ALU has nothing to do with this. Resolve your own issues with the relevant party. -butthurt noise-
There is no such thing as an ALU project, and no matter how many times you try to twist any statement, that won't change anything. You remind me of another, desperate, special snowflake. |
|
|
|
@lauda
a little question
can i add my refer in link of signature? or is denied?
just for say, no mention on first post
I haven't thought about that possibility at all. If it is your own referral link to coinpayments, then it is fine.
Side note: I've somewhat forgotten whether referral links are allowed in signatures. I think they are(?). |
|
|
|
The fact that I know the posts don't appear IS because I checked. I wanted someone (bounty manager for example) to see if it's some kind of mistake.
Thank you for your help though.
There is no mistake. You don't have enough qualifying posts, the same goes for this round. Avoid posting half liners-one liners if you want to have a chance at earning some stakes. |
|
|
|
This is how you incorrectly typed to pm as well and now here too mate. You are expecting the others to be in perfect grammar but why you have missed it mate. Is that my mistake? nope right.
Both posts to which you are referring to are typed correctly (or as correctly as they need to be). @lauda Since I do not have mistake on me. I request you remove the red tag on me. I do the same to you lauda.
So you are making a conditional offer where you are to remove your false negative trust spam only if I remove my rating? How convenient.. |
|
|
|
I am absolutely under no obligation to b) Read your PMs (not block you).
Read this sentence again (I've slightly corrected it from "Have to read your PMs" -> "Read your PMs" + added a strike-through to the first part since you apparently don't know how to read this). It clearly states that I'm allowed to block you (simplified meaning, since you apparently don't understand it), which I did after you've chosen to ignore my explicit warning. You're not the first nor last to be blocked due to PM spam (regarding SMAS or not). |
|
|
|
|
I am absolutely under no obligation to: a) Respond to your PMs. b) Read your PMs (not block you). c) Review you (being part of SMAS does not come with a 'you have to review users' obligation). My SMAS stance would have already been changed to 1 strike and no review (and you're a prime example of someone who does not deserve one), but occasionally there are examples of users who have greatly deserved their review and unlisting and thus it has not.
The SMAS list is in no way related to the forum rules, the trust guidelines or anyone's DT position. It's a list run by individuals, and as such they can do with it as they wish. Spamming me via PM, and then spamming me via false negative ratings after I've explicitly warned you not to PM me again is another issue..
If anything, after the stunt that you've just pulled, nobody should ever delist you from any such list nor enroll you in any campaign. However, that isn't entirely up to me.
You can already predict who is going to come in here, and how they are going to comment, even though I'm entirely right in this situation.
Cheerio.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
