SMILE ----> Favors? Is that how works? See, that's the problem....I'm not asking for favors; in fact, the "you do this for me and I will do that for you" trust manipulation is exactly the problem I am trying to point out ---> the quid pro quo harassment and favoritism is the problem.
I've actually never seen any DT member state that publicly, in semi-private chatrooms or otherwise. Therefore, another baseless statement. You thread with care in your statements though; If you were to start naming people in these baseless accusations it would only go downhill for you (*someone* tagged some people for speaking out). How about you just take a temporary break or completely leave the forum? That would be the best solution for your imagination.
If you knowingly advertise some shady service[1], then don't be surprise if you get tagged. I don't see anything wrong in getting tagged for advertising Betcoin.
The rating is well deserved, even though I'm not tagging people for advertising that scam. I should, but I don't. There's only so much that can be done. |
|
|
|
Story time: I wanted to discuss with you about the Turkish translation. please do not give negative trust to people without a few people's approval about turkish translate. On the Turkish forum, the user pitipawn did not trade with merit absolutely. He did not bought or sell to anybody.
he did not say that he would give money to anyone. and that he will share a few project knowledge that he predicts will be solely explored and valued. he said he would give this information with "merit", but I did not think it was forbidden, including me. Of course we knew that it was forbidden to buy and sell "merit", but nobody had considered it as a prohibition against information that it would receive.
I think that responsibility in this regard should be in pitipawn itself. you have given him a negative trust, but if you punish those who support it I think it is not really fair. there were a lot of people there who supported it and most of them certainly sent it to him in a way unaware of these events. even many of them supported it only because of nationalistic sentiments. for them, they want to see in pitipawn a higher ranking in the overall merit. Please think about what I said. because many people do not have any guilt.
a lot of people are getting their money from these signature campaigns and getting better food for their children[1], it is not fair to give negative trust to the account of many people because of only one person. Please think about this again. All this may be happening because of a rivalry between the person with the "betfair" nickname and the "pitipawn".
Within the translations that Betfair has given you, it seems as if pitipawn has not translated the places he wrote "I will give you the information if you tell me that you do not want to send merit." I really think that if it had transformed this event into a trade, it would not give information for free.
My aim is not to defend or protect pitipawn himself. my purpose is certainly to tell you that those who support it are not guilty.
I hope it will be useful. Please let me know if you have a problem about this issue.
I'm so tired of self-entitled people sending me stories privately when the case is very public and I'm far from the only person making any *decisions* here. +- he accused OP for intentionally falsely translating some parts. I've blocked saul, and archived the translation made by OP here: https://archive.fo/f8zQM#selection-4541.0-4721.10. It would be helpful if someone from the section posted here.
[1] All of these should be banned from the forum. I'll take a wild guess and say that EFS probably turns a blind eye to the shitposting and abuse in there.  |
|
|
|
Unless you can explain in-depth on how demeriting out of spite and whatnot would be prevented, you can safely move this thread to the trash can. Quickscammer and his alts would nullify me in a few days.  |
|
|
|
Very interesting and relevant quote in another thread in reputation:
...
That's not even related to me. The guy is butthurt that actmyname tagged him. ...and why can't Lauda just deny it? ...
When there is no evidence, why would I? To please the very sick obsession that OP has with me? My explicit denial of anything is not enough for OP anyways, thus it's pointless unless there is evidence for any accusation (in that case, I'd need to regardless who brought the tampered evidence up). I get all of that. I'm not saying you have to defend yourself to every account that comes along, I'm just looking at it from the perception of other members that may not know anything about QS's history who may just see you as dodging or side-stepping the claims. In your situation, I almost see it as better to not respond at all unless valid evidence were presented upfront.
True. However, when the busted baboons jump on the bandwagon along with OP's shills, then it might seem *unusually convincing* for the reader who doesn't know him and/or the others. Classic smear tactic. Spread a bad rumor here, spread another bad rumor there and hope something spreads into the likes of "a friend of a friend of a friend reliable unidentified source" told me Lauda does [insertWhateverLie]. But hey, all is good after all: "continues to help the community"... by selling DT accounts to known scammers.
I did say a little exciting. You have pushed boundaries I don't think I've seen pushed before, in relation to what is acceptable and unacceptable use of the trust system, so the conflict is not surprising to me, just good to see the activity I guess... I neither confirm nor deny whether I agree with said activities.  That may very well be, but that's still not close to where we need to be (with various policies; also non trust system related) if this place is to *work decently* again. However, with very little input from theymos and no input from almost any DT1 member there's only so much that can be done. |
|
|
|
-snip-
There is very little to no substance in your words. Although I do see the, what I usually point out as "whiny bullshit". Acting the way that you currently are is not going to get you any favors either. |
|
|
|
|
If you knowingly advertise some shady service[1], then don't be surprise if you get tagged. I don't see anything wrong in getting tagged for advertising Betcoin.
[1] In no way can a objective tag of this sort be any kind of abuse.
|
|
|
|
You people need to grow up. Tossing out scam accusations just because you are butthurt over a tag given to you. If you feel the tag was given in error, then contact the person whom tagged you and try to work it out. No amount of bullshit threads will help you.
And just an FYI, I am a competitor of Laudas and I do just fine. I would also trust Lauda to hold any amount of funds for myself or a project if they asked for an escrow, so your argument of Lauda is tagging all competitors is FALSE.
If you are following the rules of the forum and doing things as they should be done, you will have no problems with Lauda or any other of us DT users. Just common sense
Really? I have been silent on this for too long. I also have problems with this syndicate of trust abusers. It's been going on for too long now. They use shills and sock puppets to discredit their competitors reputations while boosting the reputation of their own syndicate. In today's BTC value, I have lost over $70,000 to scammers through campaigns this group has managed, yet my reputation has been painted red while their reputations continue to move up in status. It's absurd! I have been resigned to take my losses, but they are becoming significant enough now for me to consider judicial remedies of retrieval....This has to stop! Are you trying to state that I'm a scammer? Please clarify. I have no evidence of you personally scamming anybody....However, there is plenty of circumstantial evidence regarding the issue of " trust abuse" surrounding the reputation network that supports your position. I am not here to accuse anybody ---> I am simply pointing out that the trust abuse needs to stop ---> My comment was a just a response to Yahoo's comment for which he may have some personal insight. My main complaint is that there have been plenty of highly questionable events that have received no reputation demerits, while at the same time there has been a practice of ruining other user's reputations for extremely minor nuances. The big question is thus: why does a small group of associated members, many of which have been involved in seriously negative events, have green trust, while a much larger base of members, whom have not been involved in any scams whatsoever, have red trust? Isn't there something wrong with that correlation? Again, I am not accusing anybody of a scam, but I am claiming that trust abuse is a serious concern. Well, the thread is about me thus my previous question. You said you'd lost over $70k to scammers. Elaborate? |
|
|
|
Really?
I have been silent on this for too long. I also have problems with this syndicate of trust abusers. It's been going on for too long now. They use shills and sock puppets to discredit their competitors reputations while boosting the reputation of their own syndicate. In today's BTC value, I have lost over $70,000 to scammers through campaigns this group has managed, yet my reputation has been painted red while their reputations continue to move up in status. It's absurd! I have been resigned to take my losses, but they are becoming significant enough now for me to consider judicial remedies of retrieval....This has to stop!
Are you trying to state that I'm a scammer? Please clarify. |
|
|
|
Can not the accounts be linked to each other? He is my friend but we are not the same person.
-snip-
aliyagizli from İzmir, gokhan17 from Canakkale, ı am also from istanbul. Even our cities are different.
We've already heard the "we are friends" story from the Turkish section once in the past. That one got boring. Think of some unique fake explanation. |
|
|
|
nullius is lauda. That is very clear. Anyone who does not see this is simply closing their eyes.
Given the advanced cryptography knowledge (among other things) shown by nullius, I take this as a compliment. I assume that you have proof for this accusation?  |
|
|
|
|
Horrible idea and easy to abuse. Nothing to see here folks.
|
|
|
|
-snip-
There is no need to post the same message that you've sent me via PM. I've looked through your profile and couldn't find an address posted from you (prior to the alleged compromise) anywhere. Additionally, the way that you got instantly involved in some random shitcoins (Cinni, then Shadow) makes me believe that this is far from your first account. In the absence of proving (in any way) that you are the original, and the absence of any noticeable abuse (despite the trio accounts), I'm pulling back my negative on this account. My gut feeling tells me that the case is genuine, but OP has failed to provide enough evidence. |
|
|
|
Lauda.. can you come back, so we can beat up on you and your cat, or at least try?
I'm watching, from the shadows. nullius, being new here, has properly understood what Quickscammer is while the "old and reputable members" are unable to do so. In the case of the absence of bias, this makes me wonder just how much more intelligent he is in comparison to this guy: My only friend in the whole wide world is OgNasty, my soul-brother, who is just like me except that he wishes he could have sex with women.
or the other I-used-to-do-good-but-i-lived-long--enough-to-become-the-villain member.
JayJuanGee, the whole thread is a joke consisting of slinging mud my way. I've yet to see a single statement that wasn't misinterpreted (or a complete lie) in some way in order to smear my name. This is what happens when you bring competition to the escrow space, and tag account traders/abusive farmers and whatnot. Preemptive defense is what they tend to call it. Take out the competition before you're out of business. The thread has made a somewhat enjoyable turn with legitimate users discussing and not the busted baboons such as "Merited by toolbox (1), CoolWave (1)" (see OP) discussing things. Of course, the latter one is a ICO bumping provider. The collusion is clear, and you might be struck down under false pretenses if you speak out about the charity failing investment scheme. Of course it may turn out that nullius is actually an alt of Quickseller and we'll all look rather silly then, but that's a worry for another day.
I've seriously considered that. However, Quickseller is the equivalent of a rock when compared to nullius, intelligence-wise. Therefore, I find that rather highly improbable. ...From his persistent “LOOK, I’M A MAN!!” posturing, it’s patently obvious that Mr. Nasty has abnormal difficulty with women. The habits and histories developed by such males tend to be unpleasant, indeed.
Then they boldly call themselves "reputable". No reputable person would have such a disgusting history. Is there anybody stupid enough to find him credible? No, wait—don’t answer that.
You already know the answer to that question. There is also 'shorena', who was likely escrowing accounts for Quickscammer (or in general) at least in one point of time[1]. 'But Lauda, I do not feel that you should be tagging account traders!' - I wonder why.
[1] Nevermind, here's the evidence for that unlike the made-up-non-existing evidence that Quickscammer keeps talking about. Given the shady and dishonest nature of everyone involved, here's the archived reference link: https://archive.fo/jpi0S.  |
|
|
|
same guy opened a thread and begged for merits weeks ago Do you have a link and/or translation for this? EFS always says he cant do anything about local forum.
He does not want to do anything*. |
|
|
|
I can see merits being used as a currency in the future.
I mean, they behave almost the same as a coin. They are created in a limited fashion, are trade-able and people want them.
The minute that we allow this, is the minute that the merit system has completely failed its purpose and this forum is on a spiraling to a free-for-all shithole filled with *whatever-world spamming idiots*. Here's a message for the users that allow this.  Add a little tune to that. |
|
|
|
why dont mods do nothing for these clowns?
This case reveals something about EFS, who I assume has already seen the thread and did nothing. I spy with my little eye.
I need a non automated translation of that thread. If[1] this is truly the case, both the senders and OP need to be tagged IMO. That would be all of these: OP: pitipawnMerited by mich (50), fullypak (33), ap3311 (25), PrintMule (20), saulzaents (12), bobita (9), hirozaki faraday (  , longthu (7), SimonBeCoinin (6), mela65 (6), valley365 (5), newcasinobitcoin (5), slmn (4), polat90 (4), Elysio (3), kesh.zombie (3), twiifm (2), hidrocop (2), frtmr (2), avalonn (2), Asklepion (2), anu (1), dannybrown (1), Arksun (1), DarkXen (1), Uhde (1), dewildance (1), PHI1618 (1), xumit (1), Alosa (1), ParaHerif (1), nekominer (1), jopen (1), Easx (1), Metazen (1), brave77 (1), Renovatioo (1), PowerLike (1), KASAP (1), vipganyan (1), legaltrk (1)
[1] Emphasis here before some nitwit jumps on the "Lauda this, Lauda that" bandwagon of idiocy. |
|
|
|
1. Accounts Connected: kellendil, kacakkipri, cointerstrike, beatecoin, kirkcoin, perspin32, teraviboys68, ronaldopazzi72. Accounts Connected: aliyagiz207, exortis, pro2017, hidrocop, social1178, gokhan17, DarkXen3. Accounts Connected: triclinics21, trc22@gmail.com, skip604. Accounts Connected: slmn, ConspiracyCoin, furry04, USScrypto, membis, GreenCoin22, exfilesx, dragoz11, neite99, arlington Handled.
I had to post again. This is directed at OP, reagannn and anyone else who wants to post their findings. Please, write down the negative trust rating that should be applied after you've made the connection. Make sure to follow the format that I've uesd for the first round: Accounts connected: kellendil (uuid = 851530), kacakkipri (uuid = 1020792), cointerstrike (uuid = 1025146), beatecoin (uuid = 1020813), kirkcoin (uuid = 1020816), perspin32 (uuid = 1248281), teraviboys68 (uuid = 1236056), ronaldopazzi7 (uuid = 1236080).
Abusing signature/bounty campaigns.
This saves a considerable amount of time per connection, especially where the number of accounts is high. The result of you doing this would be me (and/or someone else) being faster and having more time to address more cases.
I don't have access to this. I just need to confirm "pro2017(ArToken Cappacity), aliyagiz207 (Titanium Translation)" and "aliyagiz207(Titanium Translation), hidrocop (Spectiv Twitter)". |
|
|
|
|
If I tag this:
Busted accounts: Lauda, why do you abuse the trust system?
Bonus by busted accounts: Lauda is [insertDisgustingThing] thread as criticism.
Quickscammer: It's evident that the community does not trust Lauda.
OgNasty: It's evident that Quickscammer continues to help the community.
Side note: We have a very obvious case that doesn't require any evidence whatsoever, unless you want to be a blind libtard.
Side note 2: This isn't allowed per forum rules.
Side note 3: Ban requests or other *non trivial* moderation requests tend to take a unusually long time, even though they should take minutes at most (usually).
|
|
|
|
Hello, Alia, you sly meretrix. When I first saw this thread, I thought to challenge you on a friendly wager for which of us would reach 100 merit first—or to make it interesting, on double stakes, for which of us would reach 200 first. Given the splash you made with a two-day-old account, I expected that surely, I would see you here with us other “outliers” someday. Yet now, I must call on you to do your duty in making the forum great again. For unto you is the destiny of becoming an historic forum first: The first-ever and only user to perform public sexual favours after losing what was effectually a bet against her own posting prowess. Alas, you’ve been slacking off. Though you made an earnest start, your rate of earning merit has dropped off sharply; and the days now fly by as we approach the 30-day deadline of 2018-03-01 00:52:43 UTC. Bad girl. -snip- Alia, the forum needs for you to lose your bet against yourself—and not simply for the promised payout. Foremost, it needs those posts. Moreover, it needs for this story to reach its climax. Let Legendaries a few years hence reminisce over the legend of the girl who bet she couldn’t earn 100 merit in a month, and thus wound up publicly demonstrating a merit infographic fetish. For you, such a unique forum achievement would also come with bragging rights (just as I boast being only member of this forum who has ever received +50 for a flame, as a cry from the one being burnt). Put out, but don’t let yourself down here! This writing of this post. Unfortunately, you are not a cat. Somehow I started reading your response prior to discovering the thread and got sidetracked due to *you-know-who*. I didn't notice any of the core things in your post as I flew through it. As for the bet, I've finally found it. In case that someone is confused, the bet is hereNow, as of the moment I post this, I have exactly 48 sMerit—all legitimately earned by me through meritorious posting, and as yet unspent (unlike the 145 merits I have already distributed to others).
287 over here, minus the two that I just gave you for that post.
The rest I shall not comment individually due to certain reasons. *blushes* |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
