If advertiser and manager are OK with that - how is killyou cheating?
In that case, it is not. Thought this is one of those rare cases. If you PM'd me asking to get enrolled with two accounts, I'd probably block you and tag both. As for the merit thing, I remembered killyou was already grilled on that in his own thread. IIRC he sent merits when the feature was introduced, just to test how it works.
Correct. Plausible deniability. |
|
|
|
Still though, if a DT member can tag all of these accounts it'll be much appreciated. I've made a rough list which could possibly be incomplete:
-snip-
Tag them for what? This is more of a can for hilariousandco. Just ban them all. |
|
|
|
Would I qualify to apply for the open slot? Although I easily pass the 350 merit requirement, only 37 of those have been earned since the system was added, just thought I'd ask first. Anyway, I've been looking for a long-term campaign for a while now, so I'd be happy to accept a lower ranked position in exchange for some stability.
I'd accept you, but someone already seized the senior member slot slot privately and I'm just waiting for them to post and take it. There is a full member slot that you could take, and you'd be the next in line for a upgrade if that works for you. I think I'll have to decline for now, thanks for the offer though. I took a quick look at the spreadsheet and it appears no one is close to hitting senior anyway. Perhaps you could shoot me a pm in the future if a spot were to open up? That's fine. However, don't expect me to remember and contact you. Since this thread is on your watch list, you're likely going to notice when some spot becomes open. |
|
|
|
Btctalk name: qwertysungit
Merit: 200
Rank : Full Member
Current post count: 357 (including this one)
BTC Address : 3323jy7GUKEmXpX7Mm2cEj3Dgqzr3PeSBU
Wear appropriate signature : If Accepted
Wear avatar : If Accepted
Attempted cheater. Userbame: kiddeon123
Rank: Full Member
Merit:100(even thou my merit is low all my post has a quality on it, you can check if you like)
Current post: 349
BTC address: 32r6U2J9aAAP7uaVD2GMYV1bzw521eoybv
Wearing Sig : Not yet, but will wear once accepted
Rejected. Your posts do not have quality, your posts are complete garbage. Bitcointalk Username: EthanB
Rank: Senior Member
Merit: 304 ** (Discussed in PM)
Current post count: 766
BTC Address (SegWit): 3EZp81Fkh9DzdgckGCwTZZ6uYuJoPCUVJi
Wearing Avatar and Signature.
Accepted. |
|
|
|
Just a quick question. Will the google spreadsheet update once a week? I mean for the Signature campaign.  Depends. I'm working on it; it doesn't matter much for the post count, only rather for the check whether you're actually wearing the signature or not. |
|
|
|
Sorry guys . Someone took my name on bitcoin talk and registered in telegram campaign. Who can say what to do?
PM aTriz your Telegram username and ask him to message you. |
|
|
|
My speculation is that alia paid aTriz to give the fake vouch, enter into the long term signature deal, and say that 5 months (~1,500) were paid up front (I have not seen where aTriz say this, however others have said this) to give alia false credibility. It is very well possible that no money has actually changed hands for the signature deal.
Quicksy just wants aTriz to burn at a stake.
QED. You clearly do not know what you are talking about...
Yeah, you should consult a lawyer about your escrow scams and you shall see who knows what they're talking about. Ambiguous contract snowflake. |
|
|
|
No other (feasible) way (other than my post count dropping below 29 a month which won't happen)
Yeah, no. If you were sued for this very contract, not only would it be ruled invalid you'd also pay damages to the other party. Quicksy just wants aTriz to burn at a stake. |
|
|
|
Would I qualify to apply for the open slot? Although I easily pass the 350 merit requirement, only 37 of those have been earned since the system was added, just thought I'd ask first. Anyway, I've been looking for a long-term campaign for a while now, so I'd be happy to accept a lower ranked position in exchange for some stability.
I'd accept you, but someone already seized the senior member slot slot privately and I'm just waiting for them to post and take it. There is a full member slot that you could take, and you'd be the next in line for a upgrade if that works for you. |
|
|
|
Lauda... thought you were smart. It's not legally binding, but none of the terms have been broken
Doesn't matter. If one can exit, and they want to exit, then they should not be forced to stay in said deal. |
|
|
|
The contract is not void, and there is no chance of it becoming void for a long, long time. It will likely become void if/when I am not Legendary after 3 years, but that remains to be seen. I would advise aTriz not to try and "wriggle out" of the contract, because it puts me in a position where I will be forced to reveal certain things that he has done. If he sticks to the terms of the contract, as stipulated, he is my friend, and he will not be my enemy. Being my enemy is not a very favourable position for anyone to be in. That's an extortion attempt... It makes sense that Lauda was previously defending this girl . I didn't expect your education system to teach you any better.
Given the nature of the contract, and the vagueness of its definition, it is most definitely a non-binding agreement between two parties. Therefore, aTriz can safely exit it right now. Anyone who thinks otherwise, is either mentally-deranged (Quickscammer et. al.), heavily biased (*cough*), or just doesn't really understand the difference between a binding and non binding one. I've thought about this earlier (without considering the prefunded duration), and was certain that either party could announce an exit, and do so as soon as they fulfill their obligations for the current month. If you took this to court after aTriz exited, it would be a laughing stock and not an actual case. Therefore, if it is legally correct and morally correct (pretty much everyone seems to say that he should exit), then just do it. 
This case is a very nice way of distracting from the farmed accounts that need be tagging. I wonder. |
|
|
|
Suppose I think that a gambling script which wins, say, 1000 times in a row should be possible. Of course! Not only is it possible: It is trivial. The problem is that depending on the odds of the game, it will need to lose an astronomical number of times to hit an unbroken streak of 1000 wins in a row. (Rather like after trying many billions of losing keys, I got one with a corresponding address which spells “segwit”.)
No. That's not how it works, gambling or hashing. The next bet or hash has the exact same probability of being a winning bet or a valid block hash or a super cool vanity address as any other regardless of any bets or hashes preceding it. You mentioned someone pointing you to github and that might help, but for a proper context you also might want to read some posts here in the gambling section. There are some brilliant folks here who know how this shit works and learned some of it the hard way and don't hesitate to share stuff that you won't find in source code. However I remember that she said her ''strategy'' was based on a vulnerability on a particular casino because the casino itself had some sort of script that would let new accounts win at first or something like that. It wasn't really a normal idiotic ''strategy'' at least that's what she said. I personally wouldn't vouch for something like that even if it was legit since it involves some sort of cheating. aTriz said he was aware of this exactly where? |
|
|
|
Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.
Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome. The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement. Unless she makes a miraculous recovery out of this, she will very unlikely make it. However, that would still take too long for aTriz to get his money back. Additionally, I think that it implies that he continues sending her money until that time. Interesting take. So aTriz will have to continue paying a scammer, knowing he won't get his funds back because he agreed to an awful contract? I guess feeling that way, you'd probably leave him negative trust if he refused to honor these payments? En garde. I don't think he's obligated to pay. He entered into the contract thinking someone was who they said they were and that person is clearly a liar who is misrepresenting themselves, so IMO the contract could be void just based on the fact it was created under false pretenses. I'd also add that standard public policies amongst the community has generally been that red trust == removal from signature campaigns which I believe adds further reasoning.
|
|
|
|
Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.
Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome. The contract also states that all payments will be refunded to aTriz should she fail to reach Legendary member status by the third year. Assuming people wake up and stop handing her free merit (21% of her merit comes from just one user, nullius), I doubt she will be able to meet this requirement. Unless she makes a miraculous recovery out of this, she will very unlikely make it. However, that would still take too long for aTriz to get his money back. Additionally, I think that it implies that he continues sending her money until that time.
One handed thief (the getaway car)
The one handed thief ran out of the bank and jumped into the getaway car only to realize it was a four on the floor with stick shift .
T'is one be full of th't morality. |
|
|
|
Oh my god, you really seem to have a mental problem.
Take a look in the mirror, sockpuppet. I will not close this thread for two reasons.
Did not ask you to. And second, I do not like your manner.
Do you really think I care whether some random likes me or not? Cute. I will not respond to your posts anymore!
You've said that already, and we've established that you're a liar. No wonder you like Iago. |
|
|
|
Here we go again: OP *stands down*, the forum's Iago continues his personal vendetta. manage my campaign (yet of course this ignores the fact that aTriz has virtually no experience in this field, a couple of months worth maybe).
I guess you intentionally like to make obvious lies. |
|
|
|
As for the gambling vouch, didn't he just say that it worked?
Did he check script for backdoors? That would imply that he knows more than what a variable initialization looks like. To my knowledge, he does not. I very sorry aTriz. I acted too fast and thoughtless.
/thread. |
|
|
|
You are not at all suitable to be a bounty manager.
This. The first thing I suggest to you, you must improve the way you speak English. and also I see you can not spell correctly.
But! Why are you discriminating people whose first language isn't English?? - Typical idiotic response to the above. |
|
|
|
@OP i am not sure, but maybe aTriz was thinking with his dick  Possibly. However, we rarely go on witch hunts on innocent people who made a bad business decision or two. I guess I can separate the two as a publicly run signature campaign and a privately run signature campaign, but in either case, why would a private advertising deal on this forum include a clause allowing the user to get red trust and still be paid for advertising?
I'd like to clarify this: 1) Campaign management is usually running a campaign for a third party. 2) Hiring someone to advertise for your own service is not similar to the above[1]. You can create private advertising deals that are also related to the campaign that you're managing (as per 1).
[1] If it were, then every service that entered into private advertising deals with signatures would be considered a campaign manager; which does not make a lot of sense. |
|
|
|
Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.
Other than the amount that was paid upfront, I think the same. Although the input from others is welcome. I have to assume aTriz is referring to something with his post... but I agree, it seems like the contract, as posted, should not hold aTriz accountable to continue payments. Not really, no. He's addressing the exact question, and his response is "Nope, I don't that was in the contract". In other words: The case if alia gets a negative rating is/was not covered by the contract. Still not sure why one would agree to a 5 month upfront payment in this situation. Seems like quite a risk for a user with no real prior history who has only been on the forum 1 month.
Indeed. When I was informed of the contract, I couldn't even remotely imagine a upfront 5 month payment. To get an answer from him on this, you're going to have to wait several hours though. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
