They did exist for a while - BTCJam used to be really "popular" a few years ago, though I think they had very high default rates and most people ended up trading their BTC for someone's identity proof with no means of hunting them down. It seems like BTCPop is still around, but I have no idea if people still fund no collateral loans today. (or if they're even still legit) Feels like in any case you're looking at some (very easy opportunities for) KYC fraud - high profit margin with little to no risk for the scammers. Not sure who would sustain a platform like that unless it too was a scam. |
|
|
|
Just like drug dealers oppose legalization, I can promise you account sellers are against the forum selling accounts. There would be no better way to stop the profiting from account sales and that is why the most vehemently opposed to the idea are those who would be most hurt by it (account sellers followed by insecure power hungry individuals who think a useless forum title carries importance). It would be great if before anything like that happened, people were made aware that any forum reputation or rank is not symbolic of trustworthiness - Newbies still get scammed from mid to high-ranking members. Now where's that welcome message? I still think that with account sales, they are equivalent to buying reputation and/or trust - in buying an account, one aims to take on the history of the previous account owner. Now, if theymos wanted to create an alternative for signature requirements (i.e. this idea) then you might see a slight decrease in the usefulness of account sales, but with the new DT system there are much more opportunities to capture "trusted" accounts. Presumably, this +4 green trust member changed hands according to some users.
Few other things that might be relevant to the intolerance of account sales but these are the first ones that come to mind. |
|
|
|
Would you lend a stranger over the internet a huge amount of crypto with no security to guarantee that the loan will be repaid? Maybe if you're a shitcoin enthusiast. 
Unsecured means without collateral which is $3bn market. It is readily used terms by banks and cash lenders. It has nothing to do or feel with insecurity. Probably not happening unless the users have an absolute guarantee of your identity and location, and are willing to hunt you down for the crypto. Maybe talk to some black market loan sharks - they'll help you out. |
|
|
|
Mad when payments increase, mad when payments decrease... shit, I guess in this reality unless you're not a campaign member you're always part of the problem.
Too bad theymos won't remove signatures - then what would you complain about? |
|
|
|
Now seriously, I don't think that should be a concern, in the long run it will even out as in tossing coins, unless we are the unluckiest people on this forum which obviously we are not! inb4 USD hyperinflation
We've still got time... stimuli are not gonna be coming out that fast, right? ... right? The current payments are more than fine. Now shh... time to domp the BTC price  |
|
|
|
Are you trying to be an arbiter elegantiae here? I am sorry for but you better DYOR before spitting out judgements (free advice). I have never applied for this campaign. Not 1, not 2 not even 1000 attempts from my side. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." Ironically, I don't think they are referring to you but instead people in general who were trying to bring the high payment of members to attention.
Not like it was a big deal: it was an obvious choice and anyone who wasn't expecting it... well... the campaign was probably the highest-paying for many months. Frankly, I'm surprised that they haven't changed anything yet! |
|
|
|
And to deal those what you think spam is always click the report to moderator button and not to ruin their reputation!
I had to read this sentence 2.5 times before I understood what you were trying to say--and I don't consider myself a stupid person. If you're not on his shitlist (I didn't check), don't worry about it. If you are, take a look at the quality of your posts. People generally don't get accused of being a garbage poster by a senior member unless they really are. Since you didn't check, you're not aware of the irony: everyone on the shitlist has already been reported. They're on there because they've been reported. A lot. 50 times at least. With good reports. Meaning, forum removed their posts because they were so bad. |
|
|
|
Calm down... 
I didn't do anything that wasn't going to happen eventually: your posts were shit and people were made aware of it. Don't want that to happen? Make better posts. |
|
|
|
Other than that, what's the protocol for having users on your trust list who have left significant trust but have since left the forum in one way or another? I have a few in my list but I can't bare myself to remove them (not as big of an issue perhaps since I'm not DT1). If the trust ratings are still relevant then I don't see any reason to remove them. Activity or inactivity are irrelevant * to the validity of the feedback. * in 99% of cases. |
|
|
|
Highest pay on this forum. Longest running campaign on this forum. No min requirements. Alt of actmyname running the campaign. If you leave this campaign due to a drop in payment then idk, maybe the forum wasn't for you to begin with.. There's actually no logic to leaving when there is that rule in place. It's not like you're going to be booted. Just simply no reason. Psst, Hhampuz, what was the payment that you said about that one signature campaign yesterday?  |
|
|
|
I was scammer and fraudster I was carder also if you even know who is carder I dont regret it was nice times. (Good memories)
Are you projecting? Isn't it your reputation which isn't so clean? |
|
|
|
If the reason you're tagging a user is simply because some of their posts have been removed by a moderator "50 post or more". I think you should tag everyone on that list. I don't think anyone who is on your personal blacklist should be tagged because maybe that's just your assumption based on data on bpip.org. People can still find out just by looking at the bpip site. Please explain to me if what I said above was something wrong. I personally reported every one of these users. This is my data and I can vouch for its authenticity. I am using BPIP as a secondary reference. This is why I asked about the pastebin. Since I can't guarantee that the BPIP results are 100% accurate, I am marking the users that I have in my first post. Here, you can check a small sample from 2020: https://controlc.com/9cb41449
I have my records if anyone is curious. |
|
|
|
People have rights to write, but you shouldn't abuse power. Speaking of purchased accounts, Royse is the one who bought his account 4 years ago.
And as a DT member that is quite embarrassing. Ironically, even if that were true, everything that was built up to that point didn't have any effect on his DT position or his trust ratings. In fact, if we assume that both Royse and your account were purchased, then your reputation is actually no better than a Jr. Member. |
|
|
|
I need proof of where I am spamming?  This doesn't need to be said, but if you post on a forum and 25% of your posts are deleted then that doesn't look good for you. |
|
|
|
Thank you for educating me with that, I'm not aware of it. But I don't agree with you in using the trust system to tag people you think have spam the forum. I may have some spam posts (which I explain above) but I'm not a spammer.
Trust system are suppose to be use for SCAM not SPAM.
Moderators handle SPAM.... DT MEMBERS handle SCAM.. The comments were made with neutral feedback. As far as I'm aware, that's fine for disclaimers. It is also unfortunate that (most) moderators can't really handle spam outside of simply attending to reports. Maybe you haven't been reported or maybe your posts really did get better: my reports most likely made up the bulk of the deletions and that's why you saw a lack of activity. The neutral feedback also helps to identify the worst of the bunch: when I report users for high numbers of posts, this is not just one or two posts in their history but instead the users have most likely made spam post after spam post. In fact, my reports are probably on the lower end of what they could be because I don't want to give the moderators spam posts that are too old.
Jan 18 27 Update: New batch Consolidation. 242| Google+
229| semobo
223| reliable
195| monineklutak
173| Vishnu.Reang
120| bigcash2011
99 | kesmex
98 | miningguru
98 | bitbunnny
96 | Desscount
89 | ipanks
82 | ife2020
81 | laredo7mm
81 | Distinctin
80 | pantek talacuik
76 | DeadCoin
73 | grandpix
71 | ice098
70 | thienlonghue
69 | memed97
68 | bitpotter
64 | Anonylz
60 | Rahman11
59 | shanghai
58 | Jocuserious
57 | Rana590
56 | imteaz
54 | Ludmilla_rose1995
54 | jaocoincrypto18
54 | amonymous
53 | Mahmudmach
51 | rahmathidayat93
49 | Nivia1st
48 | Oceat
47 | Surrapatt
47 | Reb Klimrod
46 | desticy
42 | Astvile
40 | Action Gamble
39 | judaspriest
39 | Hasan986 New Listings: > Anonylz > bigcash2011 > Desscount > ice098 > ipanks > Mahmudmach > memed97 > monineklutak > pantek talacuik > Rahman11 > rahmathidayat93 > Rana590 > reliable > thienlonghue > Vishnu.Reang Total reports: 3902 Total users: 78 Average reports/user: 50.02 Worst offender: Google+ |
|
|
|
So, you still have some balance there, I guess you have not to make a deposit in the meantime. what happened? 
Assuming malice, the casino would probably exit scam on the 20th when the game ends. Assuming anything else, it's a bit strange that they would email him to tell him the account was open even though he placed a bet: if he placed the bet then he obviously knew. What?
You replied with the wrong account, actmyname. Stop deflecting the thread. |
|
|
|
Part of the Spammer Blacklist: this user has made at least 50 replies that are not up to forum standards. This user is part the top 1000 worst spammers of all time. Regarding this feedback, may I know the specific "forum standards"? That would be very helpful for me if you will show it so I can improve my post. TBH, I didn't expect of this as I'm mostly participating on gambling discussions where I know I'm really knowledgeable of. Just so I can make this point clear for anyone that wants to question the feedback: Moderators considered reports of your posts good. This means that moderators thought that at least 50 of your posts broke the forum rules, most likely regarding spam.
I think actmyname should add hisself also to the spam list. By the way, somebody already has proven that actmyname has bought his account, his last trusts were from 2/3 years ago. Blatantly false.
I don't have to say anything: these users know their posts got deleted when their inbox got those Bitcoin Forum messages. I'm just letting everyone else know. BPIP will corroborate with the results. Unless I'm again an alt of Vod.
Does anyone want a pastebin of the report logs? I'm not sure what the best format to deliver it would be. |
|
|
|
You are contradicting yourself here. Someone with the skill set to create a model that can write semi-coherent posts, and actually post using a bitcointalk account is not going to be wasting their time trying to farm accounts. Their time will simply be too valuable for someone like this to earn coin like this. Firstly, what I entail isn't as involved as what you might have in your head: you're just leveraging the already-existing GAN and consuming the output. The implementation of the tool would solely be accessing the API and taking the text. Secondly, I'm not quite sure how much you could gain from account farming but presumably it's enough for some people to do it manually. I don't think this is the case of the "user doesn't want to do much work" I think this is the case of the user wants to have their posts be 100% automated, without intervention without humans. -snip- Hence an attacker would want to try to use their working model where there are robust measures to detect plagiarism. Sure, this is a thought, but I would never expect Bitcointalk to be the place to do so. Have you seen our moderation? I mean... really. I feel like someone using BCT to limit test their model would have a much higher success rate here than elsewhere - although the rules and all are pretty anti-spam, it doesn't look much like it when you actually browse the place. |
|
|
|
I hope that the number of deleted post does not increase in the future and I always try to do my best. It will be a dark past for me, and I believe the future will be bright for me. I believe I can still do my best to make up for that mistake by improving the quality of post and contributing to forum and users. That will be my great hope. Most people that I have reported had consecutive pages worth of consecutive replies of spam. This means that there were at least two back-to-back pages worth of spam that I had to trudge through in their post history. As for your current post history, it's not the kind of account I would sift through: a lot of egregious spammers will still consistently post one to two-liners that have no substance. Your post quality has improved since the reports were made.
The neutral feedback was to mark the users on this thread as it makes it easier to identify such users. Not everyone looks at these lists or BPIP. I know I haven't yet posted any public report data but I'm sure that either mprep or hilariousandco could add some credence to my list's integrity/validity - pretty sure they go through a lot of my reports. |
|
|
|
oz.kashi wanted to withdraw many times. Just update.
Adkinsbet declined my withdrawal again this is the 6 withdrawal attempt that cancel in my account.
They wanted to withdraw before those bets were made, never mind voided. How about this? oz.kashi can provide an Bitcoin address for AdkinsBet to pay to directly so we can avoid this betting nonsense. Is there seriously going to be a problem voiding just one more bet? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
