This is a perfect example of abandoning your principles to appease those in control. You are only willing to criticize approved popular targets and never those who are in "the club". If this was a post I had made trying to sell my account, you would be in your clown suit and enthusiastically preparing the bonfire for my reputation, every once and a while looking back to see if your masters are still pleased. I am especially disappointed in you because you know better and still choose to kneel.
Is it just me that has abandoned his principals? Or is just my principals that concern you so much? Or is it that my principals are of such concern to you because mine was the deciding vote that cast you out of DT1 most recently? What is it about me that is bothering you so much lately? Really Tecshare, can't I make a lighthearted joke about about the way some one continues to beat a horse's fossil? Would you prefer if I chastise Nutildah for trying to sell his account? Again? Okay; Hey Nutildah, you shouldn't have tried to sell your account. Oh, what's that you say? You learned that lesson nearly two years before I joined this forum? Okay, then. Carry on. And you are wrong about my character yet again. I'm a very forgiving person. If you had made a similar mistake years ago, and quickly adjusted your position, not only would you have my forgiveness, you'd also have my support if others attacked you for it. However, considering the way you build your trust list you still wouldn't be included in mine. There're connections, and also disconnections. Anyway, we can take this discussion to another thread, or PM if you'd rather. I feel like this is going off-topic. Look it is clearly apparent from your posts that you are pretty low functioning. However even some servile dreg of your level can NOT fail to understand this is NOT a simple case of account selling is it you moronic fuck. Most people may view account selling as merely handing their account to someone that wants to be a hero or legend just for the prestige or whatever? AS WE KEEP REPEATING' Nutildah WAS CERTAIN that selling your account resulted in people getting scammed and that it was EVIL (HAVE ANOTHER FUCKING READ MORON) If you are THEN willing to sell your account FULLY CERTAIN that you are facilitating scammers and are acting in an EVIL manner for such a small amount THEN YOU ARE FINANCIALLY HIGH RISK. How can it be otherwise?? SO STRONGLY did he feel about protecting the board from these scam facilitators and evil doers HE WAS GOING TO START HIS OWN THREAD HUNTING THEM DOWN SO THAT NOBODY WOULD DEAL WITH THEM AND MAKE THEM PARIAHS... Got it you dire posting dreg. Your posts are generally net negative garbage. Stick to flipping your burgers. Stick to posting silly little gifs and kissing ass for merits,since that is pretty much all you're capable of. Nobody gives one fuck about your inclusions and exclusions - scammer supporters and low functioning shit posters opinions are as worthless as foxpoops (who is also a scammer supporter anyway). Notice how when challenged he admits his opinions of whom should be on DT are not even based on reasoning Hahahaha .. Oh yeah wasn't this about excluding the same member  yes it was. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5184281.msg52479030#msg52479030He will pop up here any moment since he loves our posts What sort of scamming wretches and their low functioning feltching dregs has theymos allowed this board be handed over to. In light of this knowledge ANYONE including these types of people on DT should have red trust and be blacklisted from DT. |
|
|
|
[...] have fun in real life, spend little time in the forum, this will do you great. looking at post history of all DT members, looking for things to attack some DT member will not do you any good, will just stress you. don't you agree with the system? so just stay away from this forum or just ignore anything that some DT member that you think is wrong to do. that's very simple You will find that we were ATTACKED FIRST . This is undeniable. I'm not sure highlighting observable instances of clear financial wrong doing of those in positions of trust should be called ATTACKING. I mean would you claim the police detective ATTACKED those criminals that were recorded on your CC TV by repeatedly presenting the evidence until they were prosecuted? I mean that seems a strange term to use really? You could rather say presenting observable instances of wrong doing to protect other members. When people attack you or your property over and over, some will just accept and walk away, perhaps even move house. Others should try to make a stand so that those attacking know there will be a price to pay. Even better if you can bring about some changes that will prevent them and any others repeating such attacks. If nobody makes a stand, things just tend to get worse. Somethings have improved, others have sadly gone the other way. Still the board is excellent enough in other sections to still make it worth while fighting for improvements and preventing the destruction of free speech here. |
|
|
|
To be fair to The-One-Above-All aka CryptoHunter, I will tell you the story from my point of view, and how it all went down. I have to admit that he did make sense in the starting of his "war" against everyone, I remember last year when all he complained about was how some DT members use the trust system, I and some other members did agree to the points he made, because they were accurate , since we all know that DT members are not perfect and some of them use the trust in a terrible manner, that was the first discussion I had with CH and Suchmoon IIRC, and if you ever heard the following sentence " You can tag someone for using the word Lemon" it all started back then in that exact same thread CH started  At that time most members actually opposed marlboroza's negative feedback on CH , and marlboroza did remove the tag back then, at that point of time I guess CH used to like me since I was on his side against other members who thought it was okay to tag others for saying the word 'Lemon' a while later he started another "war" against the merit system,unlike the first "war" , it was a meaningless one, CH made little to no sense from that point onward, I opposed his ideas and thoughts regarding that matter, and then he felt like he lost me to that "gang" and since then he thinks that I have joined the "gang" to gain strong position at the forum (not really sure what position he means) My analysis on CH is that he is not mentally sick per se, but he takes the forum way too seriously , imagine you have to worry about every aspect of the forum every day and every night before you go to bed, it must be so tiresome, this sort of over caring about the forum made him an aggressive person, if you don't suck up to him, he will think that you are afraid of the "gang", I think CH suffers from "over-reliance on imagination" and that's it, I hope it gets better with time, I really wish him nothing but the best. The reader should note that mikey is not as corrupt nor a direct scammer or scammer support like most of DT. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0The problem with the above post and with mikey in general, is that he does not grasp that MERIT is a far more dangerous problem than the TRUST system alone. I mean for example one should understand that pretty much that merit score is DT. Cryptohunter clearly detailed the specific problems with the systems of control here, these were never debunked because they are simply an observable description of mechanisms upon which the systems of control operate. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5088852.0That was before it got WAY WORSE and merit was (against CH's advice in that thread) tied to DT. Making both systems in effect one and far easier to game. ' Mikey does not clearly understand what everyone else pretty much on this thread understands... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190024.0That merit is subjective nonsense that if you want to give it to a 5 year old one word post then you can and it is not breaking any rules. If you want to give it to debunked garbage then you can, if you want to just give it for any reason and claim you considered it a good post then you can. Who can say you did not consider it a good post? that's the thing with subjectivity there is no definition, no criteria, no thresholds, no limits...haha Now the concept is very simple but mikey still does not accept what of course ANY person would accept. If you create a system that is so wide open to " abuse" ( in terms of giving it to objectively valuable posts) that it is impossible to prove it was abuse, AND THEN you give huge financial (and other) benefits for abusing it..... GUESS WHAT WILL HAPPEN. I mean to claim this makes no sense is quite strange from any objective point of view. The reader should probably note, that mikey probably DOES use the merit system to allocate merit to posts he considers high value, he likely also sees posts he makes that are high value receiving merit. This anecdotal experience is so powerful that he is unable to accept that ABUSE IS INEVITABLE and is totally observable and accepted by most when they start saying you can give merit to anything you want. Mikey also has been reasonably fair to CH and to our good selves in the context of the other scammers and scammer supporters infesting DT. However to NOT act upon his observations that OTHER DT members totally abuse the trust system renders him open to criticism. DT will never work if the semi - good members sitting on it all sit around saying... " well yes I can see that some DT members are totally abusing the trust system and even red trusting people for whistle blowing etc.... but I will not do anything about it. Also it can be annoying when he jumps in to seemingly protect proven scam facilitators from criticism with advice like " leave them alone please" but does not say to them, why not stop red trusting our account when there are ZERO instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their past. Unlike your own nutildah. So although mikey can not see many things including why at times we are disappointed in his behavior we do not hold grudges against him. He has not scammed, he has not trust abused. He has his opinions, some of which we strongly disagree with and have clearly debunked. @ every other dirt bag on this thread What part of screaming TROLLING over and over and FAILING to produce any examples of our central points you term TROLLING have been debunked or even a semi successful attempt to debunk them are you not getting They say he's trollin, they hatin.. DT's = Stop trolling us about... our past scamming and scammer supporting, trust abuse or any other points made about the systems of control. TOAA = Present the trolling please so we can see what you mean DT's = errrr stop trolling you errr hyper troll TOAA = Present the trolling please DT's = Ignore him everyone please he is a troll TOAA = this is a fun DT's = See how he is mentally ill TOAA = No please present the clear evidence DT's = He should be banned TOAA = why should we DT's = Trolling of course or rather hyper trolling TOAA = But all we have done is present observable instances and described the undeniable implications of said instances that you can not debunk DT's = Trolling again hey hahaha It is simple, your claims are bogus and are the satisfying anguished cries of scammers and scammer supporters that have been undeniably busted. Those observable instances can be presented and there is nothing you can do about it. ( I MEAN YOU CAN LIKE NUTILDAH TRY TO DELETE THE PAST IN TRUE SCAMMER FORM) but then you just look even more shady. All you have is crying = trolling, trolling , hyper troll..... and then the embarrassment of NOT BEING ABLE TO PRESENT ANY EXAMPLES of our debunked central points at all  Screaming ban him, ban him please, just makes us smile. You can not ban the truth of observable instances in your pasts?? Any member could present them at any point and of course they will. Theymos is maybe slack on you dirt bags, but to ban someone for presenting observable instances is going to look pretty bad isn't it? and what for? so others can start presenting the same observable instances? The entire control systems are based upon CONFLICT to regulate them. Right now it is perhaps 50 vs 2or3. Those odds will improve over time. Perhaps theymos is waking up and looking into your past deeds and noticing you're ALL spamming highly paid sigs here and saying to himself " how did people with such dirty past histories manage to become the most " trusted" and highly paid posters here??? HMMMMMM perhaps that does need looking into after all. Another fun part of it all is getting to boast about all the true legends past achievements, and demonstrating that none of you have ANY major achievements here after all this time. You may ignore, but the readers are free to read the truth, which we intend to inject when ever and where ever this is on topic and relevant. Just accept it. I will simply appear to them as it appears to us. You have no answers or rebuttals to our points. How silly do you all feel screaming hypertroll and then not being able to present any of our central points that you can debunk??? Pretty silly right? come on be honest for once. |
|
|
|
OMFG a new willing feltcher arrives... The Guzzler... mind out of the way...please
screams trolling but presents zero evidence of any central points he is able to demonstrate are untrue. Well done, perfect form.
Welcome the newbie bukkake boy for the next DT party. His C.V. says... my froggy skull will make the perfect space hopper ......looking forward helping vod burn some much needed calories off.
Spray him boys down with the merit jizz for now, until you can get your filthy paws on him.
Thanks you xD That's too good! I'm so happy I've found you! You're too good to ignore!!! I have zero evidence and more, I haven't read even ONE of your central points. And I'm not going to xD Thanks for admitting you just spout shit and have not even read the observable instances we have presented but still want to claim they are trolling. You are going to make a great addition to their group of imbeciles. Please low functioning feltching frog, go eat dirt for merits elsewhere. Thanks for the bumps but don't burn yourself out. Wait until this goes on page 2 please. |
|
|
|
I totally ignore the capslock text. And it's really time-consuming for the reader. This is more annoying to me than bold text.
I'm trying your advice. What does the end of your probable scam promoting sig say.... I can't read it those dumb fools left the caps lock on. What promises does it make? These tips on this thread are really helpful. Saved me a lot of time already. |
|
|
|
Ahahahahah xD I don't know if you deserve the merit as you're encouraging a troll, but still fuckng funny. But omfg I just discovered this guy. What the hell? What the actual fucking fuck?? I'm complaining about some people on the local forum but that's a brand new troll level. I gotta apologize to the local French guys for being pissed of by them compared to that xD OMFG a new willing feltcher arrives... The Guzzler... mind out of the way...please screams trolling but presents zero evidence of any central points he is able to demonstrate are untrue. Well done, perfect form. Welcome the newbie bukkake boy for the next DT party. His C.V. says... my froggy skull will make the perfect space hopper ......looking forward helping vod burn some much needed calories off. Spray him down boys with the merit jizz for now, until you can get your filthy paws on him. |
|
|
|
He should absolutely be banned for trolling.
There's no question about it. Every single one of his posts under his TOAA alt is attacking other users on the forum. Every. Single. One.
He's never contributed positively to any aspect of the forum, whatsoever. I honestly don't understand why theymos puts up with him.
He says he's not a troll but he continues to rehash the same tired points after repeatedly being shown evidence that he is wrong. That's what a troll does -- they ignore all reasoning and rationale in order to continue pointless, all-out flame wars.
In the time since CH / TOAA started his crusade against me, I've only become a more trusted member of the community. It hasn't effected my standing negatively in the slightest; on the contrary, its probably increased my standing.
Until theymos bans him, there's not much we can do except for continue to ignore him.
He cries Please ban him for attacking scammers ..haha... Please make him stop. I want facilitate scams and get away with it says nutildah. I want to commit undeniable financially motivated wrong doing BUT i want to be rewarded and given powers to punish others for daring to tell the truth about my past. hahah Keep crying nutildah .... keep begging people to ban us. Ban him please, make it stop. I hate hearing the truth about my past he squeals. I just want to get away with demonstrating I am willing to fuck members over for a price and pretend I'm a good guy who deserves to be on this highly paid sig campaign and punishing others that have done nothing wrong. You heard it here first folks.... 1. nutildah who was in 2014 running around this board screaming account sellers are facilitating scams and being evil and HE HIMSELF was going to start a crusade to highlight them and bring them to justice so that NOBODY with deal with them. THEN GOES AND TRIES TO SELL HIS ACCOUNT for 0.3btc ......and wait for it......wait for it........ YES we are now trolling because we are daring to mention it ...hahahah The trusted DT and merit source nutildah or notildah depending on if you believe the message posted months after the account was placed for sale claiming " err no longer for sale now" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.02. He claims we are cryptohunter and then says have never positively contributed to the forum whats so ever?? We really? you may want to research how cryptohunter hunted and forced the largest scam ever on this board to offer a 2 000 000 000 USD compensation offer to the entire board? You may want to wonder why many complain he stopped that project knocking BTC from the top spot on CMC You may wonder why there are threads from members celebrating him and thanking him for making them into millionaires by giving out his tips for free. 3. He points out he is MORE trusted since we have been highlighting he was willing to facilitate scams for 0.3btc after screaming he would be hunting down and crushing account sellers because they facilitated scams by selling their accounts. Yes he is MORE trusted by other scammers and scammer supporters. That does not mean you can trust him does it. Examine the kind of people that have manipulated the merit system for their own ends and made sure their OPINIONS on who you can trust are heard ABOVE ALL other members. Go ahead and examine who his friends and those who include him on the trust system are... here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0You wont need to go far to find them though they will all be arriving here shortly to collude together they will not dare deny anything we say because we shall simply ram it back down their throats with observable instances they can not deny. This is an old pattern that we enjoy it goes like this... We present observable instances of their undeniable financially motivated wrong doing or their support of such members and they scream out with the only things they can = trolling, spamming, mental illness. WHY NOT DEBUNK OUR POINTS SCUMBAGS haha Oh wait you can not debunk observable instances can you? Well you could try foxpoops method??? give out opinions as if they are valid rebuttals.... then when you put them under scrutiny and they fall to bits he will just say " opinions don't require reasoning" LOL what a fucking retard. See how these people once put under some real scrutiny just fall to pieces??? their front of colluding together and proving financial incentive to support them is effective but can not stand against undeniable and observable instances of their prior wrong doing. TL DR Each time we turn up on their threads... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9FYBjSc3cU |
|
|
|
He tried to sell his account on a year when account selling wasn't even a thing and he did posted it on his account, nutildah, which only says that he ain't an account seller. Like how other DT members views it they only tag account seller that are just account farmers who basically are just here selling off other farmed accounts to make a living. Based on the archived you gave and how nutildah is still posting today it only means the account wasn't sold at all so basically a sale didn't even happen, there was only an attempt to do so.
Not true at all. See Bill Gator. Also, what evidence do you have it was not sold? The seller's word? If the current users in control of the default trust didn't have double standards, they would have no standards at all. They regularly abuse their authority to protect their own positions and that of their supporters while using any excuse to bury their critics while the few good members on it turn a blind eye in order to protect their own status. Should though we really class these other "good members" as " good choices" for DT since they will turn a blind eye and allow this to continue for their own selfish gain? I'm not so sure? The core group of scammers and scammer supporters for pay are so entrenched now in DT that even if a "good member" would speak up on DT they would likely be removed from DT pretty swiftly. Even the designer and warden here will not really dare debate the folly of the entire thing since it is pretty much undeniably a total failure. The problem is most people simply have zero back bone and weak minds. How could one ever possibly think to decentralize power among such dregs without removing nearly every shred of possible subjectivity from the system. Instead he makes it 100% subjective lol Where is anonymint of some kind member with more than a one day course in game theory to demonstrate clearly the entire thing is bogus and folly? I mean it is fine point out the results so far a pretty much 100% fail, but he seems to be hanging on for some kind of self healing from the system that is NEVER going to arrive at this rate. Plus he just keeps hamstringing it more with more and more merit based weightings. Anyway nutildah realizing people are referencing his post as clear evidence of willing scam facilitating (when taken in the context of his prior rantings of how he is sure selling an account is facilitating scammers and is evil) has now edited it and his thread title to better explain he has changed his mind and it is annoying that people are even turning up to the view the details of the evidence THAT ARE NOW DELETED. LOL |
|
|
|
I hit the ignore button on his profile long ago. He will go away once everybody denies him the attention he deeply craves.
Me too, and I'm not feeding him or any of his alts anymore--there's no point in doing so IMO. Theymos obviously isn't listening to his rants and suggestions on how to make the forum worse, and that's all that really matters. I said a long time ago that cryptohunter's posts and threads ought to be boycotted, and the same should hold for his alt accounts including TOAA. He takes breaks for a while, but you'd think if he had any rationality at all he'd get the message that what he's doing is completely useless. I'm not sure what his objective is unless it's trolling. Go research ThePharmacist on this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0Then decide if you can take anything he says about posting and trolling seriously ever again. The guy is a non achieving shit poster that is also a broke down bum. If he wants to refute this then go ahead we are all ears. Apparently insisting we can no longer put up with the gamed and abused systems of control that create a 2 tier system here that allow non achieving prior sneaky racists trolling shitposters lecture others whilst getting paid by the highest paying sig campaigns here is a waste of time. Also he says introducing some transparent rules that will ensure all members are treated fairly and equally IS MAKING THINGS WORSE He uses theymos's apparently inability to design anything other than a devise, two tier creating , free speech crushing , easily gamed and abused shit hole that is streaming all of its best rev streams into the pockets of proven scammers and their supporters as some kind of proof that we are wrong LOL haha the pharmacist, research that piece of shit and his PROVEN ALT HugeBlackWoman and then see if you want to believe a word that snake says. |
|
|
|
|
Another scammer supporter added today.
Mogsprosnoz - or some shitty name, just research for some tool spouting mental illness as the new explanation for people who present observable and undeniable instances of financially motivated wrong doing conducted by his scamming DT pals. How does this kind of turd world skid mark get on to DT. Who ever heard of this piece of shit anyway previously? Yeah I want to trust moronpigsnoz a known pal of lauda and tman and yogg proven and documented scammers and scammer supporters that have no answer to their actions other than to scream trolling as if it is some kind of valid defense haha
|
|
|
|
Sorry to bring some truth to this thread LOL 1. These " attacks" are the presentation of observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing by DT members and their scammer supporters who include them into the trust system FACT 2. o e l e o = Not telling the truth - they started attacking cryptohunter FIRST for pointing out the obvious merit cycling and other flagrant abuses of the systems of control FACT - verify for yourselves by pulling up the early merit threads started by the true legend cryptohunter 3. The sig spamming dregs here on this thread are NOT bitcoin enthusiasts that will contribute for free. They fear the true competition from other members for their " highly paid" sig spots and will try any tactic to prevent transparent rules being introduced that will guarantee the fair treatment of all members. 4. DO YOU NOTICE THEY PROVIDE ZERO EVIDENCE for any of their claims??? Examine our threads and those of the true legend cryptohunter. If you can find ANY central points that you can debunk then bring them forth for analysis. THEY WILL NOT BRING ANYTHING. They claim presenting the truth and highlighting their scamming and manipulation of merit and trust to capture the best rev streams for themselves = trolling, mental illness and spamming  Who have ever even heard of moronpigsnoz before? sounds like some turd world shit stain that is here to support scammers. INVESTIGATE who he does support actually and make your own minds up. Look who he has on his trust lists of includes people that are PROVEN scammers and scammer supporters. The guy is pure turd world dirt. Have a read here the sorts of people you are dealing withhttps://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0Then go to meta board and pull up every thread started by ourselves and cryptohunter. Examine them in detail and read the observable undeniable instances provided there. Research them for yourselves. |
|
|
|
How about capslock? I've the impression that it's more annoying to read text in CAPSLOCK than bold text because usually it's also expressing anger and aggression. Or maybe my judgement regarding capslock is only a little bit damaged from some people using it frequently where normal text seems to be not enough.  Bold text is fine if it's used in a decent way to highligh parts of a text or for sub-headlines. Same goes for smileys. Capslock means capitalization that has its helpfulness if used relevantly, just don' abuse Capslock. I think using capitalization for topic title in OP can be acceptable, I do it too. However, weeks ago, when I made my thread on posting technique ( Bitcointalk posting etiquette), and I reread theymos' guide, I deeply rethought that topic title in OP is likely unnecesary, IMO. It simply repeats what writer already mention in topic title. I have still not had my final thoughts and decisions for my next threads (as well as edit my old ones), but I will keep that idea in mind. As you see in my thread history, my recent threads don't have titles - that repeat topic titles - in OP. I would prefer to keep doing this, because I feel my threads look better. Yes, I agree with you, it's quite possible that capslock can be used for the title to specify the content (like [SERVICE], [ANN] / [BOUNTY] or [OPEN] / [FULL] for signature campaigns) or to improve the layout of a post. I can't remember if I used capslock in my posts, usually I'm using bold in my guides or underlined font for explanations sometimes. Like you've already said: it's relevant how often such features are being used and where (when writing a plain text, special formatting isn't useful but it's very useful in guides or even to outline technical stuff (for exapmle the formatting style of nc50lc in his technical explanations is a very good one.) Of course highlighting of certain words can be useful. Regardless of bold, uppercase or color. To even waste time on a big conversation about it is about what one can expect from chipmixer spammers. If you are getting paid 7 bucks per post, you could place the letters in the correct order. We post for free so take it dirty or you can have a full refund. Can you believe the board has financed you gaining 14 bucks or whatever for this garbage. What is darkstar thinking? Someone creates output containing some bold, uppercase or color you don't like. Move along. Sure the effort to reward ratio can vary slightly (within a sensible range of caps, bold etc). I'm sure those presenting real value here are not going to abuse it to a level that seriously impacts that ratio to anywhere near worthy of a thread about it. Actmyname has some strange fonts he uses for fun that make it hard to read. However, I'm sure he will not use those if he really wanted to convey and important point. Caps is not anger or shouting in all cases. It just saves time using other variants of emphasis or highlighting. |
|
|
|
Best to keep to topic since it seems to be becoming a bit of a witch hunt and verging on some double standards. We do not think dabs is perhaps the best selection for merit source nor perhaps staff. However, from the evidence presented in the thread there seems to be some glaring issues with singling him out for some kind of punishment. 1. those posts are pretty low value in our opinion BUT they are not as low value or as net negative as many posts that receive merit on meta board. Therefore the abuse there seems to fall short of any required action if we are not going to act against most merit sources. 2. his asking for bitcoins seems completely out of character to what you would expect from staff here, HOWEVER at least this is just some honest if distasteful approach to gaining some extra bitcoins or bitcoin dust. This does not seem as bad to us members and staff gaming the systems of control to ensure they have unfair advantage over other members with regards the rev streams here. What is more strange is that dabs seems to see nothing wrong with it and mentions leaving him some bitcoins even in this thread. Just seems like a person that thinks it is fine to openly ask people for money even those he does not know or have any connection with. That is kind of weird but in some cultures they do this. I guess it is at least open and honest if there is no kind of threat or punishment for not sending btc to him. At the end of the day. I would rather members just ask others outright " hey I'm broke can you give me some bitcoin dust" than I would see the systematic gaming and manipulation of merit/trust to ensure unfair advantage of the available rev streams here. Most of that gaming and manipulation is conducted by people frequenting meta board. Better that nobody asks others for money or games the systems of control for unfair access to money. However that is likely asking too much. The asking for money is at least fair and open and honest. Do we honestly believe dabs is the only person giving merits to low value shit posts? It is quite fucking simple. Whilst merit has huge financial incentive to abuse (in terms of not really giving it to objectively high value posts) and it is wide open to abuse to the point where abuse is impossible to prove THEN GUESS WHAT WILL KEEP FUCKING HAPPENING? ....answers on a postcard to.... Imagine we have one of these threads every time we locate merits going to people for low value garbage.....haha Let's fix that. What is even more funny in a way. Is the post saying: Well, we can not introduce any kind of criteria or definitive guide for allocating merit, because it is all so subjective. Well, that is kind of the point, if you drill it down hard enough and only allow merit sources that have the capacity to measure all output against those requirements then you will REDUCE the subjectivity to a huge degree. Reduce the subjectivity reduce the room to abuse. You are correct about one thing that DT can not moderate it since merit=DT Dabs may be abusing merit , but he is not abusing any more than most of the merit sources here. End of story. I mean even if you could prove a perfect correlation between those that sent him bitcoin dust and merits he gave out, he can still say well I just thought they were good posts and there is nothing you can say about it. Honestly, we favor merit sources selling merit to those that can not get it, above cycling to their fav 20 pals who cycle it back to them. At least the collusion and control of systems of control will be more decentralized. Can you sell in blocks of 250 so we can get some kind of real decentralization going on DT and also force theymos to realize the merit metric for DT is totally retarded. I mean both selling and cycling are wrong and have no connection to real merit. Still if we have to choose one.... Just dump merit theymos it was broken from day one. Noob jail being removed was probably the worst move ever (apart from introducing merit) Of course if it is found that he crosses the threshold of merit abuse or any other abuse then it is down to theymos to decide. However far better to tackle this at a design level or it will open the flood gates if you want to hold to the same standards. |
|
|
|
Nutildah edited his old posts and he knows that it was already archived.
According to you, he is a scammer and shouldn't be trusted, right?
Now, what do you say about someone who dropped his main account and created a new one just because it is hard to edit 13657 posts?
Who should we believe?
CH you are a great person. Just forget about merits and trust and act normally.
You are fighting for the wrong cause.
@ theb Your point is invalid. Please read the thread. This is about a determined willingness to facilitate scamming for a price. NOT JUST SELLING AN ACCOUNT. Please read the entire thread. This all boils down to financially motivated wrongdoing . THIS IS UNDENIABLE. @ khaled0111 knows it is archived? so what? people are not essentially to know this or even bother checking his trust list. Why change a post nearly 4 years after the event that is linked to many times as evidence of financially motivated wrong doing?? to try to put a better spin on it. What was the price of bitcoin when he was willing to facilitate scamming and EVIL members for 0.3 BTC dust? does not take much does it? is that even 20 pieces of silver?? scam buster to willing scam facilitator for 0.3btc or perhaps less. No takers though apparently lol Let us stick to the topic and to what we can prove is UNDENIABLE. You point regarding a member finding it hard to edit 13657 posts is irrelevant and has no meaning at all. Financially motivated wrong doing will certainly not be found there. Fighting for the wrong cause? So you say a person like nutildah who screams that account selling is evil and facilitates scamming and is so sure about it he is going to start his own thread and trace them down and make sure people don't deal with them........BUT THEN decides for 0.3btc he will turn evil and facilitate scams himself is NOT a financially high risk member? One that then alters the very incriminating post and thread title years later only after it is becoming a huge issue for him now that he wants to punish people for lesser crimes? say oh i need to change this because people who I punish are linking to this thread so I don't like that and am going to change it ?? You say fighting scum bags like this and fighting for a transparent set of rules that ensures fair treatment of all members is the wrong fight?? the wrong cause you say?? @suchmoron We will take from your merit to that above post that you are supporting scammers and members that undeniably will willingly facilitate scaming for a price editing their posts have been linked to as evidence of financially motivated wrong doing. Is that why you are giving merit suchmoon? you think it is not shady for scammers/scam facilitators to alter their incriminating posts that are linked to as evidence of financially motivated wrong doing? That's interesting. I wonder if you are including such willing scam facilitators on your DT inclusions? suchscamsupporter? Dare not get involved in the debate since it will come down the same yes or no end game as moronbozo, so just hides away sniping with merits. What a pathetic fool. |
|
|
|
If you have scraped the board even a couple of months ago you should have the unedited post should you not? I don't scrape the entire board, only new posts (from Recent Posts). Ah okay, understood. |
|
|
|
If TROLL starts TROLLING everyone, should this be allowed allowed allowed allowed ? Does this look bad or good? Trolling for months if not years and back to meta and reputation to troll again AFTER it has been pointed that trolling is NO NO? Why TROLLING if it is NO NO?. Why why, oh my, WHY? Let things be exactly as they were before trolling. Anyone thinks trolling is acceptable behaviour ?!?!?!? We, aliens, want all reasonable explanations WHY is TRoLLinG acceptable, if it is acceptable, if it isn't acceptable why it isn't. Haha, Ha. ha. COME here with REASONABLE explanations when you will stop being troll and we will maybe listen to you. Do you think you will always be a troll? Yes or NO? Don't be afraid to answer.
[...] We will indulge your off topic derailing for one answer only. NO we are not trolls, therefore we could not remain something we were not in the first place. Now back on topic please. Make a trolling thread about us if you like. Not here though. Yes or NO? Do you think you will always be a troll? No need to fear us, simple YES or NO question.
Local rules: aliens from alfa and beta quadrant are allowed to discuss this. No gama and delta quadrant here. Using wormholes to sneak your way into this thread from delta quadrant is not allowed. The reader should note the above example of trolling. No attempt to substantiate his allegations, asking if we fear to answer a question he even quotes we have answered and attempting to mimic our excellent and unique posting style. Some attempt at humor we suspect but with such a person who can say for sure. Our posts on the other hand are examples of high value output, full of observable instances and central points that have never been debunked. Robust critical thinking that sends them running and cowering away from even being able to say yes or no to questions posed. To many of the chipmixer sig spammers (not real bitcoin enthusiasts but rather some paid2post broke down bums that even have different avatars so they can boost their paid2post rates) and that means a large swathe of DT and merit sources ..TROLLING = presenting inconvenient truths and observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their post histories. When people can not prevent you presenting observable instances they are only left with screaming trolling and asking their mod pals to delete you content (which they do at times) All of our central points relating to : the merit system, the trust system and abuse by DT members, the implications for rev streams and free speach basically the ONLY things we post about generally remain there unchallenged and not a single example of even one central point being debunked EVER by hoards of these MOST MERITED and MOST TRUSTED members. All legends in their own minds with zero achievements to demonstrate they have made any real difference here and plenty of scamming or scammer supporting observable instances in their pasts. The reader should simply read every post we have made in relation to the topics we listed above and try to debunk them. Once they have been debunked clearly then willful presenting as true of those central points could be considered as trolling per the board rules. Since they remain robust and untouched and since most are simply observable instances that are undeniable .... you could be forgiven for considering them as truths rather than trolling Note the thread in the quotes from the OP here. Follow that thread and research for yourselves. Then read our other threads on the topics mentioned above and if you feel you find some central points contained within that you can debunk then feel free to present your case there and we will come and see what you have to say. The truth is not to be confused with trolling however many times these types members try to conflate the two. |
|
|
|
Go to the other thread if you believe you have something of value to contribute on nutildahs behalf.
I don't really give a shit about Nutilda or anyone else for that matter, you claim that I don't understand the subject when it's clearly you who have a problem with understanding how the forum operates, you are discussing a trust/scam/reputation stuff in Meta which is pretty useless, your topic should be in reputation directed exactly to those who tag account sellers but chose not to tag the member in question, which you had before and I think you have gotten different answers for why he wasn't tagged, everyone had their own justification regardless of whether it made sense or not. You know what almost everyone is going to tell you ? Theymos made the edit button for a reason, and as long as they are not editing someone else's posts, members are free to do whatever they want their old posts, period The problem is that you think the forum is 100% fair and that everyone is treated equally, history has proven to you that this is not the case, it's not a perfect world, you must understand that there is no place on earth where everyone is treated or judged the same, this is how human beings are created for God's sake. I am not sure why are you so aggressive, I am trying to help you, you really have some serious problem and online account sales should be the least of your concern. I really wish you a speedy recovery and good luck. Wrong again. Just telling you that you are wrong and do not understand is not aggressive. It is simply how it is. Speculating on why you keep presenting these specious arguments often resulting in you suggesting we don't present the truth for examination relating to undeniable financially motivated wrong doing of fellow dts is perhaps for another thread. Meta = system wide actions that have system wide implications. Trust matters, what meets the threshold of a scam debates, debates on anything that may have system wide implications really, and those can have in part have implications for reputation too. Sometimes meta is far more appropriate to determine objective opinions if you do not introduce personal and political factors such as pals , fellow dts, etc. This thread is clearly not only asking about account selling, or one person, those were added by other members including you. If they wish to make examples of what they recognize as behaviors by individual members that is their decision. We prefer to keep the discussion as relevant for meta. We note your council to leave him alone is a one way street, we don't notice you doing shit to prevent him constantly abusing our trust and that of others. Now as we keep telling you, stay out of things you either do not understand fully or that you may understand but want to support shady scum to maintain your position. That is friendly advice to you mikey, not aggressive at all. We understand your position, but best not present specious arguments as some kind of valid rebuttal. We will be forced to pick you apart. We get no pleasure from it at all. So stop it and stay objective and push for fair and transparent rules that ensure the fair treatment for all members. No point saying things have always been unfair so we will just allow grossly unfair control systems to rule here. NO. |
|
|
|
Please make up your mind , is this topic meta or reputation related ? Anyhow, I can't answer on behalf of everyone, but if I posted something in the past and later on I realized it was stupid, I see no reason why I shouldn't edit it, we all do things we regret and we wish we can "edit them" only if everything else was as simple as editing a post on forum. For those who don't know, it's pretty obvious you are talking about Nutildah, you have brought this up a couple of times, I am not sure why do you keep expecting the results to be different, let's evaluate the reasons why he got away with whatever you think he deserves to be tagged/banned for. 1- At that time it was okay to trade accounts. 2-He is a protected member of the "gang" / impunity. 3-Nobody gives a fuck. Whatever the real reason is, why do you care so much?? and please don't get me wrong, I dislike Nutildah as much as I like you , but leave the man alone and move on with your life. Mikey mikey mikey, If we make it specifically about nutildah then it is a reputation matter. If we use a similar scenario as an example as applicable to ALL members and want to gage if it should be acceptable practice in general for the forum, it is a meta board issue. Do you understand now? Again you seem incapable of staying on topic. We did not say if you did something stupid did we? have another read. Are you saying when you do stupid things you just start wanting to facilitate scamming for a price? is that what you mean? and then when it was highlighted and other people caught on and started referencing this you would go and change it?? that does not sound good mikey? DELIBERATELY TRYING TO FACILITATE SCAMMING OF OTHER MEMBERS AND BECOME WHAT YOU YOURSELF CLAIM IS ACTUALLY EVIL FOR SOME BTC is not silly or stupid. It is scamming. You see the problem is mikey you don't seem to have the capacity to get the central point as with many of your specious arguments they may be well intended but they are net negative.You are better off just keeping your head down. We see you added chipmixer now so we recognize it will be hard to dare stand up for the right thing since you are in such bad company there. Sorry but you don't seem to have this correct either... I mean if a person clearly demonstrates he is willling to facilitate scamming, and turn evil for 0.3 btc in the past and then when he is busted he feels it is okay to go and edit that evidence then LEAVE THE GUY ALONE attitude is clearly not applicable. You don't get to pick and choose ABOUT GIVING A FUCK selectively depending on who you view is a danger to your sig rev or standing on DT. Perhaps you are don;t have the capacity to get the point or you just need to do more research. There must be set standards for all members here. No we don't give a fuck about you but we do give a fuck about others will not wash any longer. No more derailing and making your own DIFFERENT questions up. This is about people that are willing to facilitate scams for a fee. Are you willing to facilitate scams for a fee mikey? Are you saying if you done something you considered WRONG and DANGEROUS FOR OTHER MEMBERS FOR SELFISH FINANCIAL REASONS or admitted you would be willing to facilitate scams for a fee and you got busted, and people had linked to that post (IN ITS ORIGINAL FORM) as evidence, that you would then go and removed the original post and thread title and deliberately remove details that the honest members here should be privy too? Is that what you mean? or are you just trying to drag this off topic and present ANOTHER faux rebuttal? don't become net negative mikey. Stick to posting about matters you have a firm grasp of. Now no more trying to apply this to just one member and derail it. Go to the other thread if you believe you have something of value to contribute on nutildahs behalf. We will your specious arguments apart on there. The next person trying to apply this to a single member and turn it into a rep matter will be reported. This is a broad examinations of peoples opinions of this kind of behavior in general. Not all about that willing scam facilitator. Why would we leave a scam facilitator for pay alone? especially in light of the fact he keeps abusing our account even recently. Sorry but no. We will keep presenting the truth as and when we see it is on topic relevant and valuable for other members to read it. |
|
|
|
!!!FEAR!!! You see how answering yes or no is so difficult for moron bozo? we strike terror into this poor servile wretch. Dare not answer it seems. He knows we will slap him around with that forever if he says YES. If he says no then he is damning his pal nutildah to being more shady than he already is. No way out in the yes or no game for moron bozo. colluding scum. Poor guy, how embarrassing to fear in public answering yes or no Trying to derail now Back to the spamming of words attack vector you devious devil... you are almost there now. It will not be long now before you have irrefutable evidence of spamming words. Meanwhile supporting scammers and fearing to answer yes or no to a simple question. Look how easy it is We will indulge your off topic derailing for one answer only. NO we are not trolls, therefore we could not remain something we were not in the first place. Now back on topic please. Make a trolling thread about us if you like. Not here though. Derailing often also shows fear of the central points being made. Fear!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Well let's not make this specific.. This is ...SHOULD ANY DT1 member or any other members be editing the evidence that demonstrates THEY were clearly guilty of financially motivated wrong doing. There is NO DOUBT on the issue of whether it was financially motivated wrong doing or NOT. There was no doubt in their mind they were guilty of facilitating scams for a price. It's obvious you have someone/something specific in mind. Why don't you just come out and say what you mean? Let's not get into specifics. This is a broad rule for consideration.
Scammers and clear financially motivated wrong doing - when the evidence is presented to the board and it is highlighted (perhaps years after the event) does it look shady to go and edit this incriminating post ??
Probably, but context is important, and your post is completely devoid of it. What rules are you talking about anyway? Last I checked, trust is not moderated. If you want to try to smear someone's reputation, there's a board for that: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=129.0What more context can one need. Evidence of scamming or undeniable intent to enabling scamming for a price. Once the post with the incriminating proof is found and highlighted, then does it look shady for them to go and edit it and delete various relevant details that the honest members should have access to? Rules ? I think you mentioned rules, and trust moderation. Let's keep to the initial post and not get derailed. Does it look shady or not? is it acceptable behavior of a DT1? let's hear some opinions. But let's keep to the initial post. I mean surely the simple answer is If a post is highlighted as evidence of financially motivated wrong doing and this is undeniable, then the person guilty of said wrong doing going and editing the post that contained the details of said evidence is clearly SHADY and sneaky. That is why people archive scammers incriminating posts, and reference the archived link, because they know scammers would just go and edit it when they are busted and the reference link would lead to a bunch of excuses and lack of the detailed evidence that was there previously. Altering your incriminating post after being busted is clearly shady. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
