The banks have closed Trump’s non-political business accounts, and closed Trump’s personal bank accounts. (This came after Stripe banned Trump’s campaign.) They don’t just want to defeat Trump politically: They want to destroy him personally. This is the face of naked tyranny. I now stand with Trump.Congrats to the “liberals” who voted for this banksters’ darling: 
Full-res embedded here, because I want to encourage sharing. Thanks to suchmoon for the lead on this image of a smug Biden!  |
|
|
|
Even though I am poor, I offer to send a modest amount of Bitcoin to Trump if there is an authenticated way to do so. Furthermore, because I am guessing that Trump himself probably has no idea how to use Bitcoin (in the “not your keys, not your coins” sense), I offer free consulting services if he contacts me: I will tutor him on how to avoid financial censorship, set him up with his own “Be Your Own Bank” private wallet, and send him some coin to get him started. Of course, the likelihood is negligible; but I damn well mean it! Bitcoin was made for this:And now, I officially support Trump.* The banks have closed the business and personal accounts of the President of the United States. This is undoubtedly the single biggest case of financial censorship in living memory—and one of the worst-ever cases of financial censorship, period. It is an historic moment. Either you are a willing slave of the banks, or you oppose their tyranny—there is no middle ground.Counting down before some idiot says that the banks are “private” institutions, and you can just start your own bank if you don’t like them... That will be the nadir of self-parodying bad arguments on Satoshi’s forum.
* As long as he doesn’t do any more of the things that I have always despised. Which was, in large part, tweeting big-talk promises that I correctly predicted he would not keep. He can’t do that anymore, now can he. —Oh, and as long as he doesn’t cave in to pressure and cry to the banks for them to like him again.
Local rules. Note: I may move this to Bitcoin Discussion; it is fully on-topic there, too. |
|
|
|
Welcome back. I have neutralized the negative trust feedback that I left for you on 2020-11-27. I will explain why. You returned just after Lauda left the form permanently. Since the day she left, I have been dealing with baseless speculation and conspiracy theories which posit that Lauda will return, or will return as an alt, etc., etc. The context made me realize how damaging it can be when someone affirmatively declares that he is leaving permanently, asks for his own account to be locked, and then later comes back. And generally, it shows unreliability of character. I distrust that type of flip-flop. On the other hand, if you wanted to re-engage with the forum, it was honourable of you to reclaim your old account (with what appear to have been quite some controversies) rather than quietly to restart with a new identity. That should be commended. -1 + 1 = 0. My initially negative view of your reappearance compelled me to check your trust page, and follow the reference links. I saw some evidence of dealings that I definitely disapprove and distrust. I didn’t dig too deeply into all those old threads, which occurred when I was gone from the forum; but it was at that point that decided definitely to red-tag you. However, in the overall circumstance, I think it is warranted to neutralize it and see what you do in the future. Since your return, you have taken a strong stand against plagiarism. I respect that, and I weigh it accordingly; you seem quite sincere about that, and it speaks well as to your character. I also respect your promotion of PGP; it is much needed by the community, although of course, I would not make trust decisions based on that. |
|
|
|
 Mike PompeoLong live our feline friend, shame she felt that she had to leave. So many hours & so much effort put into this forum now consigned to the history books.
Meow old friend, Meow.
Mr Secretary of State of the United States, I think this will amuse you. It is approximately reconstructed from memory, since Lauda made me wipe all of our e-mails before she left: Nobody: [Extended rant about Trump’s abysmal lack of character, and how he breaks his most important promises.]Catbat Witch: I like Trump. He’s funny. Nobody: I like Trump’s tweets, too. The problem is that he doesn’t mean what he says. Catbat Witch: No, I like Trump. Nobody: Hiss.Catbat Witch: Meow.This is especially significant because the two of us always bonded over our mutual anti-Americanism (mine admittedly much more extreme than hers). It is impressive that any American president could win her approval! As such, Trump did deliver on his promise to Make America Great. (I will omit the “Again”, which begs the question of past greatness.)Meow to you, too, Mr Secretary Pompeo.
Lauda will never return here. Correct.
Yeah but there is plenty of time for dying...later It is a good aphorism.
“Remember who you are, what you are and who you represent”
You most certainly did represent the true value of the community! Farewell! Happy New Year Lauda. Once again on the new year, it feels hard to believe that we will begin 2021 without Lauda  LONG LIVE (the spirit of) LAUDA! Thank you all.
Lauda will never return;
You seem so sure about that; I am not. A person like lauda probably already has alts. Maybe they mentioned it elsewhere. I too doubt he will be gone forever, or maybe will return at some point perhaps under a new account that he may or may not announce and may just be discovered by someone. I think for most who make money from this forum it is too lucrative just to abandon without good reasons, unless you already maybe made megabucks and just decide to sail off into the sunset, but either way why still walk away from that when you can earn a decent amount from here without too much effort and it's something you can do anywhere in the world either in your mom's basement or on a beach in Bali as long as you've got an internet connection. I am morally certain of this, based on the substance and substantial vehemence of our discussion when she left. And Lauda keeps her word; if she says she’s gone, she’s gone. Furthermore, what is this conceit that an Internet forum is so important that people must be irresistibly drawn back to it? Some people have real lives. If you cannot imagine anybody ever leaving the forum permanently, it says more about you than about others. But if you want to go down some deeper rabbit holes, here is a bombshell insider leak for you: Lauda was an alt of Quickseller. The epic little quarrel-and-make-up routine was simply disinformation, so that you would never guess. The Lauda identity was deactivated because Qs is Trump’s secret anon forum account; and as the election approached, he had to wind up identities that were taking too much time to maintain. PROOF: The U.S. Secretary of State just posted to Lauda’s goodbye thread under his real name, as verified by a blue checkmark! And “Quickseller” begins with the letter Q. Q.E.D. What more proof do you need? Lauda, a.k.a. Quickseller, a.k.a. Donald J. Trump is still here, and he always will be.
If Phinneaus Gage's account can come back from the dead (though obviously not literally himself) then I'd never say never to Lauda reappearing if he hasn't already. What an awkward comparison. Well, I will follow it one step further. When you called out that individual for having tried to sell account(s), I thought that it was an ugly but necessary public warning that should be done without regard to emotions. Now, instead of repeatedly posting authoritative-sounding misinformation and conspiracy theories about someone whom you obviously didn’t know at all, why don’t you commend Lauda for burning her extremely valuable account instead of selling it? After all, to condemn wrong without recognizing right is just pure negativity. In monetary terms, Lauda’s account was orders of magnitude more valuable than the GG account. There are people here who would have trusted Lauda’s word of honour with more BTC than I have ever seen in one place. It is exactly why she was so adamant that her identity must be killed with finality—and why, as a lasting service to her, I am on guard against any faulty thinking that may lead to rumours that Lauda is back as so-and-so. It would be the perfect setup for a scam! —No, Lauda is gone, and she will not be back here. Emphasis is in the original:I do not want any chance of an impersonation scam in a name that many people trust.
Over the years people have even trusted "Lauda" with different sums of Bitcoin. I have one of the highest name-recognition accounts on the forum. This places on me a responsibility. It is not to feed my strong ego that I say, it is a valuable account with a high reputation - a trust that people place in my unseen body, through the name of "Lauda". If I cease to be "Lauda" then according to my well-known principles, I must affirmatively prevent anybody else from using this name and forum account ever again. Please, hilarious, let’s not start the rumour-mill. Do you really want to see Lauda sightings like Elvis Satoshi from now until the next century? Sure. The speculation will be fun if/when anyone suspects it. Besides being annoyingly stupid, the speculation could open the way for scams. Which is exactly what Lauda has hereby so striven to prevent, in case OP wasn’t sufficiently clear. |
|
|
|
OP, I respectfully suggest that you revise the local rules, which currently ban the President of the United States from posting on this thread:This thread is self moderated and will be censored at a Twitter level A million smug liberal nincompoops chorus in unison: “If Trump is banned from Twitter, he is free to go to Parler!” Google, Apple, and Amazon: “LOL, ne Parler nul.”  N.b., I am obviously neither an American GOP type, nor a libertarian; and I detest Ayn Rand. Thus, it would be unwise to reply with strawmen based on positions that I have never held.At least a few liberals are hold fast to their own stated principles, rather than wallowing in the doublethink and self-serving hypocrisy that are the hallmarks of modern “liberalism”. It is sickening to see the ad hominem attacks hurled at them for their failure to shut up and conform to the party line.  (Re the announcement of the Facebook permaban. Long tweet threads excerpted to a few brief selections.)At this jucture, I must highlight the importance of Bitcoin to the freedom of speech. Financial censorship directly translates to the censorship of thoughts and ideas; for as a practical matter, systems of communication cost money to run. Parler has a competitor who has far more experience with “deplatforming”: Gab. Overall, Gab is a fascinating study for those who are interested in censorship resistance. Hereby apropos, Gab would have gone bankrupt long ago, if not for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the only way to send money to Gab online. (They also accept cheques snailmailed to their postbox; but that is obviously a non-starter for an Internet startup.) And ever since Coinbase deplatformed them, they have used Bitcoin for real, with their own keys on their own node managed by BTCPayServer. So, here is the thing, for example, Gab right now is using, Gab.com Is using a BTCPayServer and basically recently they have been targeted by political opponents to try to shut them down even if they did nothing wrong.
[...]
Gab.com before you trying to use BTCPay, like trying many other solution. Basically, they tried every single centralized payment processor that they called and like MasterCard, basically it was like pulling the strings to prevent them to service gab.com. At the end of the day, they become maximalist because that’s the only thing they… the only way for them to accept money then. No matter what your political views, it is wise to recognize, as Mr Dorier evidently does, that free speech isn’t free unless it can be paid for. Someday, if financial institutions and Big Tech companies want to shut you up, Bitcoin could be your only hope for keeping your voice. Go, Bitcoin, go!
Come on man. Not long ago you were still putting effort into the 'I dislike both sides equally' charade. You do me a calumny. I have presented Trump as Kerensky, and Biden as Lenin. Wherefore “Trump ≈ Biden”, not “Trump = Biden”. Perhaps my metaphor was too subtle for typical Americans, who are ignorant of both history and political theory; but that is not my problem. America’s soft-pedalled October Revolution is a bad thing. Trump is not good. As I warned my American friends five years ago, he was never going to “save the country” or “make America great”. He is a big talker, and he says many of the right things; but he is a money-man and a playboy, a culturally degenerate parvenu in spirit, not a knight in shining armour. He has always been as such: It is who he is. But things can be worse... Now after Trump sends an angry mob to storm the capital and stop congress from counting the votes you're going to play the 'dems trying illegal coup!' card? Really? You know we know you know what a coup, sorry- coup d’État is, right? Anyone who accuses Trump of having incited that riot is either a liar, or a fool who believes the liar-media mischaracterizations of Trump’s communications that are difficult to see for yourself, since Big Tech has been trying to wipe them off the Internet.
In Soviet America, Bolshevik Biden’s opposition is banned from the InternetBack on topic: Biden memes! Hmmm, something is a bit off... FTFY. And at this point, my corrected text is barely hyperbole: - Per the above:
So where does this leave us? Probably down a dark road. He can go to Parler if he doesn't want to be on Twitter.
Immediately after Trump was permabanned from Twitter, Parler was simultaneously deplatformed by Google and Apple (= the apps that average Americans know how to use) and Amazon (= their website). That really puts the lie to the “he can go to Parler” argument! The Big Tech oligarchs want to ban Trump and his supporters from the Internet, period. - For typical Ovine-Americans, social media are “the Internet”. If you believe in democratic principles (which I do not), you must acknowledge that it makes a farce of democracy when a major politician is suddenly kicked off the mass-communications systems that the masses actually know how to use.
Actually, come to think of it, depriving political opponents of means of communication is a classic move for a strongman dictator who hasn’t yet consolidated the power he needs to arrest them, or to have them shot.
If a political faction with rising power in a third-world banana republic restricted its opposition’s ability to use popular social media sites, what would you say about that? —Now, what is America? A “free country”? LOL!
(I myself was never on social media, because I frankly despise the masses and I do not care about influencing them. No, I am not a populist.)
|
|
|
|
The sinister insurrectionists openly advocating a coup d’État via bad-faith abuse of the U.S. Constitution’s 25th Amendment should not only beware the appropriateness of a counterrevolutionary response: They should remember that it’s common knowledge that their President-Select is demented. * nobody notices. —Or is that merely a fast-track for President Harris?  |
|
|
|
As described below, I believe that I was inadvertently responsible for this. I intended to settle it with DTs via PM, but didn’t get around to it. I request that everyone who has red-tagged Lauda for the purpose of warning that she’s gone should agree to neutralize negative feedback. Because the Lauda account is permanently disabled from login, to use it for posts or PMs requires obtaining administrative-level access to undo whatever theymos did. If a hacker were to obtain such access, he could simply delete all negative feedback from the trust database; therefore, the red tags are completely useless for their stated purpose of warning people that this account should never make new posts or PMs. Such a hacker could also post as Satoshi. In this aspect, why should Lauda’s account be treated to a different standard than Satoshi’s? —Or should we all now red-tag Satoshi’s account, for no reason but to warn people not to trust new posts or PMs from uid=3?
Unfortunately, I started the trend: I was the first to red-tag Lauda’s account. I did it because she asked me to, at a time more than seven hours before theymos arrived on her goodbye thread. Or to be more precise: I asked her if I should tag her account, and she said yes. From my perspective, it was a very bad moment. The question of my tag on Lauda’s account was low in my priorities, and would be for some time. Lauda herself obviously had no way of knowing with certainty how theymos would handle this; and it is no secret that she was still online when I tagged her account, because she sent merit to this (albeit not specifically to this *): Merited by Lauda (5)(I will now edit that post, which is hereto unedited.) By the time that theymos replied, Lauda was long gone.It's sad to see you go. Although there were various small bits of drama and conflict, you've been one of the most active and dedicated members of the community over the course of several years. (And if there's no conflict, then probably nothing is actually being accomplished.) I hope that you're not in any actual danger, and I hope that you will be successful in whatever you choose for your future. I will request that theymos ban the "Lauda" account (u=101872)
Done. Lauda is banned in the same way as satoshi, such that it isn't possible to even log into the account anymore. At that point, I saw my tag as an historical artifact. I couldn’t ask Lauda if she wanted me to untag her account. But I didn’t think that it was too important, because I am not in DT; and anyone who trust-includes me must be savvy enough to know to ignore my tag on Lauda. Thus rather than deleting anything, I countered my own tag with new positive trust feedback, so that Lauda is +2/-1 from me. This is my current feedback to Lauda, excluding some neutral notes: Trust summary for LaudaTrusted feedback| nullius | 2020-10-21 | Reference | Principled. No hypocrisy. — What money the account *could* have sold for! Or she was perfectly set up for an exit scam.
Honesty is what one is, not only what one does. | | nullius | 2020-10-19 | Reference | Starting with the date of this feedback, do NOT trust any further interaction with this account, or with anybody claiming to be Lauda. All of Lauda’s cryptographic keys have been revoked, and there is no way to contact her. | | nullius | 2020-03-04 | | Lauda is superlatively trustworthy with confidential information which she has promised to keep as such. I say this based on my substantial experience with her handling of confidential information. For obvious reasons, I cannot publicly disclose evidence of that experience; nevertheless, I will personally vouch that I would trust her with almost anything. — Also, I would trust Lauda (and have trusted Lauda) with money that I could not afford to lose—with no better recourse than opening a Reputation thread, if she were to steal it. |
I will now neutralize my red tag (d=271846).
* After I sent her 50 merits, and she thus had 25 sMerits, Lauda sent 5 merits each to the first four replies on her thread. This happened to include two of mine. She then sent her last 5 sMerits to Satoshi’s last post, and disappeared. |
|
|
|
I already received merit in this thread; please don’t send any more here. I am just having fun promoting PGP by sending private messages in public. :-)Bitcoin and PGP belong together!-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----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=NyRZ
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
|
|
|
|
The tyranny machine does not stopI urge the people of Missouri to support Senator Josh Hawley. The irony-challenged publishing gatekeepers at Simon & Schuster have decided to punish Senator Hawley for his attention to election integrity, via their cancellation of this book, which had been scheduled for release in June 2021: The Tyranny of Big Tech
By Josh Hawley
Missouri Senator Josh Hawley argues that big tech companies—Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Apple—represent the gravest threat to American liberty since the monopolies of the Gilded Age, and proposes a democratic, hopeful path forward. No doubt, that is only the first such reprisal in store. Missourians, Senator Hawley acted with a moral courage rarely seen in the U.S. Federal den of thieves and liars “legislature”. Don’t let him down!
Reference number:
db4b57d9dd5779b04988bd4520de55f44f84d76fd7d594a6ea53f49bb8ce380e
[...]
1. If the election results are officially contested in any way, then the bet will be resolved by waiting to see who actually takes office for the next U.S. presidential term.
Otherwise, the loser of the bet shall pay it promptly after the election results are announced, and the losing candidate concedes or otherwise indicates acceptance thereof. As of today, Trump effectually conceded on Twitter (a fitting end for him). —Or at least, he “otherwise indicated acceptance” of the election results. I have therefore sent 0.01 BTC to the NCLA in txid 40fca7f95058864b1457fb8f626fd02a97aba7f502386ad30f7ca184f5ee81c4. I may follow up with some brief political commentary later, if time permits. To connect the blockchain transaction to this bet, I embedded the reference code from my bet commitment in an OP_RETURN. Unfortunately, I was experimenting live with some new code; and I inadvertently encoded the script opcodes twice. There is therefore an extra 6a20 prepended. I feel embarrassed to send from a non-Segwit address. As of today, if you use a non-Segwit wallet, you look like a n00b who does not know how to choose the right wallet! However, due to my intent to expose the blockchain data from this transaction, I decided to use an address from ChipMixer. The address was obtained using ChipMixer voucher codes that I set aside for this potential purpose in November. I always keep a moderate amount of money in Chip vouchers, just in case I need to do something bad for my privacy. The money for these vouchers may have been deposited by me anytime in about the past three or four years; thus, any blockchain observer who identifies Chip inputs will not find it feasible to guess which were mine.
I have been away since mid-December, and my time for the forum is now negligible. My apologies to those who have sent me PMs and e-mails, which I have just now found. I will reply to you soon.
|
|
|
|
I don't post much but have appreciated years of reading you. You will be missed.
All kitties deserve a good afterlife may yours be long and prosperous =^.^=
Highly active posters are only the tip of the iceberg. Most of the forum’s real readership is probably from lurkers and rarely-active members. What you say resonates: I knew Lauda’s reputation before I even registered. From experience, and from the odds, I have wondered how many people are saddened by this thread, but don’t even have a forum account—and don’t want one. Bitcoin Forum > Other > Serious discussion > What are we wasting our Lives on?25 days, 3 hours and 7 minutes spent on bitcointalk.
Time is your most valuable asset: never waste it; enjoy spending it as often as possible.
Thanks for your post.
Sixty days, no Kitty, words null. |
|
|
|
I'm concerned about all the dozens of messages I've received about you using merit as a carrot. :/ (Please don't lie to newbies) Aww, c’mon! Is nothing sacred? PGP and Bitcoin belong together. Most hardcore Bitcoin maximalists are also hardcore PGP users. One of the earliest contributors to Bitcoin was practically the co-author of the original PGP. (Well, PGP 2; PGP 1 was uselessly insecure junk.) For those who don't know me, I'm Hal Finney. I got my start in crypto working on an early version of PGP, working closely with Phil Zimmermann. When Phil decided to start PGP Corporation, I was one of the first hires. I would work on PGP until my retirement. At the same time, I got involved with the Cypherpunks. [...] When Satoshi announced the first release of the software, I grabbed it right away. I think I was the first person besides Satoshi to run bitcoin. I mined block 70-something, and I was the recipient of the first bitcoin transaction, when Satoshi sent ten coins to me as a test. I carried on an email conversation with Satoshi over the next few days, mostly me reporting bugs and him fixing them. For my part: I have been warring with OgNasty for almost three years. We ~ed each other when I was at Member rank, and I currently have two red tags on him. I don’t trust him, and I don’t like him. Nonetheless, I can acknowledge that his thread hereby is a legitimate use of source merit to promote the community’s best interests—to promote crypto, actual crypto, not just “wow moon ath lambo” nonsense. If I had merit source privileges, I might run such rewards-for-learning threads myself (and I have even considered applying for source privileges, for similar reasons). Although I usually despise merit giveaway threads, this has a constructive purpose; and it is not a ploy of, “beg for me to like your post because I am too lazy to pick good posts and/or I enjoy having losers kiss my arse to read their worthless drivel”. If done with caution to avoid sending merit to spammers, this thread is a good idea. As a practical matter, it will work better than my PGP “bounty airdrop”. After 20+ years of my miserable losing battle to make people use PGP, and my 3 years of fighting to make people STOP SENDING UNENCRYPTED pmS!!! on this forum, I am willing to refrain from gratuitously criticizing a PGP advocacy thread. If I dislike the person running it, then I will either stay away, or politely contribute. Wherefore I spent some effort to contribute positively. Too bad: OgNasty nastily insulted my contribution, and refused to acknowledge that I had, in fact, sent him an encrypted message. (As if that were something that I would get wrong!) So as to avoid derailing this thread from its PGP mission, I considered opening a Reputation topic, “Does OgNasty know how to decrypt a PGP message?” Then, I saw that he sent merit to a most excellent Newbie—which he probably appreciates, since I know that he generally has no problem sending merit to weird things. As such, I decided to drop it.
What could be wrong here? If this thread were giving security-ignorant, technically inept advice, then that would need correction. I made some such corrections to some other users in my first post on this thread. If OgNasty were dropping merit on bounty spammer accounts, then this thread would be a problem. But it seems that he is cautious against that; and he made a good point here: My merit giveaway threads have been a bit of an eye opener on these bounty spammers. Who are these bounty managers that are paying these accounts? What sort of fraudulent bounty alt account schemes are these people enabling that people are spending their time making these accounts? Why does the community tolerate this? Not the topic to discuss this issue probably, but I have a hard time not pointing the finger at bounty managers who are clearly failing the community. It reminds me of Lauda’s encrypted private rants speeches about what she called “the enablers”. Most of the spam and scams on this forum could be stopped, if not for the enablers. Beware, Mr Nasty: If you talk that way, you will soon fall under the witch’s spell. An encrypted message not sent for merit—just because it is fun to send private messages in public: gpg -a -s -e -r 0xA338C617DE66E656 -r 0x5A00591B2F307E0C < 2020-12-18.ognasty.txt > 2020-12-18.ognasty.asc
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----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=bWhN
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
|
|
|
|
Objections: - It won’t work. This is trivial for spambot authors to work around. All that a bot needs to do is to make one post which will have a high probability of passing human review from someone who is not following the thread in which the post is made. The old spammer trick of copying and pasting an earlier post in a long thread can be fully automated—as can a text spinner, to prevent catching that with a bot, too.
What I predicted, I have now observed in the wild: A spambot account starts with a few posts that look plausible when viewed out of context, with text that looks copied and pasted from somewhere. Meta Log| DateTime | Action | Detail | | 12/18/2020 12:28:01 AM | Changed to Archived status | Nuke user |
Spamfighter advice: Never unfollow old threads. Context is your friend. You best know the threads in which you yourself have actively participated.I caught this one because its second post was on an old thread that is still on my watchlist. The post was fully grammatical, and it did not contain any links (not even hidden links). Nobody would report that as spam, let alone as a spambot automated post. Because I remembered the context of the thread, I immediately detected that the post made no sense: Its content was totally irrelevant to the subject matter of the thread. It was not related to any of the prior posts in the 13-page thread—not even as a topic-drifting side discussion! But if you were to view the post without reading the whole thread, then you would not see it as spam. It doesn’t look like spam. Whereupon I examined the account’s post history, and I found that its first post was of the same nature: More or less grammatical, no links, sensible within its four corners, and totally irrelevant to the context of the thread. Read that post, and ask yourself if you would report it. Then, view the context and ask again. A list for scrutinizing each account’s first post (or even its first few posts) would not catch this.
I can think of some easy ways for the spambot authors to attempt blending into the context. For obvious reasons, I don’t want to explain. Suffice it to say, an intelligent reader who has actively participated in a discussion has the best vantage point for catching any automated tricks. —Unless the spambot authors were somehow to make their bots write good, original posts that contribute to the substance of discussions! That would not be a bad outcome. |
|
|
|
Is Ratimov habitually spamming the Russian local with Google translations of others’ articles?
Yes, he is. With such brave investigative work, soon you will be a Hero Member with >3000 earned merits, DT1 status, and merit source privileges hated by certain parties. Keep it up!
Maybe the officials are still puzzled and looking for a way to stop this kind of activities. I hope so.
I have not had time to analyse his post history. Is Ratimov habitually spamming the Russian local with Google translations of others’ articles? If so, then even with attribution, that runs roughshod over the purpose of Global Rule #27; and it also violates the Russian local forum’s rule against “stuffing”, insofar as the posts are just copy-paste jobs.
Yes, it is. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224353.0Ratimov and zasad@ are corrupt. They both spammed Russian local with Google translations. [...] Google translations for Bitcointalk is more valuable than anything else? I have no other reasonable explanations for the facts of farming 2 spammer's accounts into heroes in 1 year and for amount of merit exceeding the activity by ~4 times. Thanks for the insight from a Russian local regular. I have a question that perhaps may be best answered from your perspective. I detect from your signature (and your previous signature!) that you have a certain... dislike for sigspam. I myself have always refused a paid signature; but I am more moderate toward this issue. I think that some good people get paid for their time and effort on the forum; and because they are good contributors, they only accept signatures from campaigns with the best reputations for zero spam. Now, in the thread to which you linked (and johhny linked before here), I noticed something that made me uncomfortable. Vadi2323 (Legendary, registration date in 2014) has a parody signature hostile to Chipmixer. As a privacy advocate, I have oftentimes defended Chipmixer’s reputation. I even ran my own little custom Chipmixer ad for nine months, with zero payment — not in the official campaign! — only to show solidarity with Chipmixer, and to protest against this type of hostility. I wonder, why the hostility toward Chipmixer? Is the Google Translate spam from Ratimov bringing ill repute to his sponsor inside the Russian forum, where perhaps the campaign manager may not be able to follow all activity? My thanks for any further insight that may be provided by you, or by other Russian forum regulars who despise spam. (Note: This text has been tested and modified, to make it a little bit easier for Russian users to read with Google Translate. Thus, it is not quite my usual writing style.)
Satoshi, we fucked everything up. (johhnyUA) It is a wise quote. On many points. Unfortunately. P.S., fxpc, perhaps I would copy your signature — if my signature were not bought and paid for by my PGP key fingerprint! |
|
|
|
Что за идиот дал Ратимову право учиться читать? То, что каждый имеет право учиться читать, портит надолго не только писание, но и мысль. Так говорил Заратустра: “О чтении и письме”
Нет. Глобал Модератор мпреп задал теймосу общий вопрос о Глобальном правиле № 27 (против машинного перевода) — но нет о плагиате — но нет о Ратимове! Вам нужен Гугл Переводчик? Ратимов это нужно. (Также — Ратимов есть врун.) https://l7kgsqobws5a6q3bfxemtazoey--bitcointalk-org.translate.goog/index.php?topic=703657.msg55789411#msg55789411P.S. А то будете ещё пару страниц фигнёй страдать  Да: Фигня “набивания” Ратимовом.
Так как цель у 80 % этих переводов это не просвещение нас, крестьян кривозубых, а вполне себе естественный карьерный рост, резюме чтобы в рожу баунти менеджеру было что тыкнуть  против захламления локали переводами от непрофессионалов, которые не могут прокоментировать и добавить что-то свое и ответить при необходимости на вопросы, поднятые в теме
Полностью согласен. Причем специалист даже не сможет создать новую тему, так как она будет считаться дублем, благодаря этим горе переводчикам.. а писать в уже кем то созданной навряд ли он будет. Я им дибилам тоже давно это говорил, им мериты важнее хули.. ^^^ Это. Сие. И мошенники называют меня троллем?  Так говорил нуллиус в Мете — некачественный перевод Гуглом (ЛОЛ, исправления нуллиусом нескольких наихудших ошибок): Все еще ждем ссылок на хорошо осведомленные посты Ратимова, которые не являются копипастом. Почему никто не отвечает? По-прежнему нет ответа. Делал ли Ратимов какие -то качественные посты из собственных оригинальных работ !?Возможно, некоторые люди могут не понять, почему этот случай вызывает мой гнев. Но это должно разозлить любого, кто потратил много времени и усилий на создание оригинальной работы на этом форуме. Если бы мне задали тот же вопрос, что и Ратимову ScumBuster, я бы просто указал на свою историю сообщений! Я делаю только оригинальные посты! Хотите выбрать короткий список? Я просто попытался выбрать десять своих лучших постов почти наугад, и в итоге получилось одиннадцать: - Re: Почему люди так ненавидят сегвит? (2017-12-04) 16 достоинств, хотя этот пост для новичков был сделан почти за два месяца до запуска системы поощрений. Оригинальный комментарий с моих собственных слов, подкрепленный правильно процитированной цитатой Грега Максвелла относительно ASICBOOST. Сообщение №11 в моей истории сообщений.
- Один из моих лучших постов о конфиденциальности. (2017-12-06) Этот пост для новичков также получил некоторые достоинства, хотя он был сделан за два месяца до того, как достоинства были. Полностью оригинальное короткое эссе с некоторыми оригинальными идеями, которые я никогда не видел, выраженными где-либо еще.
- Уровень безопасности открытого ключа Биткойна. (2018-01-31) На мой взгляд, один из моих лучших постов. Полностью оригинальный текст, за исключением одного скриншота таблицы из стандарта SEC 2 (документ, определяющий secp256k1).
- Сообщение о том, какие стандарты доказательств следует применять DT в спорах на форуме. Полностью оригинальный текст (за исключением контекстных цитат в ответах). (2020-02-05)
- Лауда - ВЕДЬМА, которая наложила на меня злое заклятие! СЖИГИТЕ ВЕДЬМУ! (2018-02-18) Оригинальная сатира, которая повлияла на первоапрельскую шутку теймосом 2018 года и дала Лауде ее последний постоянный аватар.
Примечание: меня не было на форуме между 24 апреля 2018 и 01 января 2020, а также с конца мая до конца августа 2020 года. - Проект Анастасия: Биткойнщики против кражи личных данных. (2020-01-05) Не только оригинальный текст, но и в высшей степени оригинальная идея: сравнение кражи личности Сатоши Крейгом Райтом с самозванцами, которые выдавали себя за Великую Княжну Анастасию Николаевну Романову.
- [WO] Банковская система не работает (2020-09-18)
- [WO] Проведение мозговых атак об «отмывании денег» (2020-09-21) Короткое «У императора нет одежды!» пост в стиле, указывающий на ошибку, которую я не вижу, чтобы она обсуждалась. Оригинальное мышление.
- [WO] Взаимозаменяемость, Payjoin и CoinSwap (2020-10-05) В основном ссылки или цитаты из других источников; но связывает это с моим собственным комментарием, объясняя, почему это важно.
- Почему конфиденциальность? - Re: Покупка домена (анонимно) с использованием биткойнов (2020-10-28) Сосредоточено на правильно отобранных цитатах некоторых материалов jlopp, но это только для поддержки моих собственных комментариев.
- Судья соглашается с nullius: Ключи = титульное владение (против бенефициарного владения) (2020-11-25) Опять же! Я не только использую свои собственные слова, но и выражаю собственное оригинальное мышление или, по крайней мере, независимое мышление. Насколько мне известно, я первый, кто когда-либо идентифицировал сущность Биткойна как актива на предъявителя, и в этой связи проводил различие между титульным владением и бенефициарным владением - по крайней мере, я никогда не видел, чтобы кто-то еще говорил это раньше, чем я. (Я впервые высказал эту идею 19 января 2020 года, как цитирует самого себя.)
Представьте, что я лично сюда вложил! Теперь я чувствую себя обманутым. Для Ратимова, чтобы получить социальный статус, заслуги на форуме, власть DT1 и финансовую компенсацию , обманывая публику с помощью грабежей , это пощечина любому, кто когда-либо тратил реальное время, усилия и virtù на этом форуме.Это заставляет меня задаться вопросом: зачем я тратил свою жизнь на участие в этом форуме?Конечно, я не говорю, что говорю только о себе. Другие участники или потенциальные участники могут чувствовать то же самое. Это вредит здоровью форума в долгосрочной перспективе: Ратимов показал, что честный труд - это глупо.. Таким образом, перед нами та же проблема: обобщенная версия закона Грешема. Плохое вытесняет хорошее. В результате складывается такое положение вещей, при котором честные и правдивые считаются более глупыми. Это закончится убеждением, что лучше принять участие в проступке, чем стоять в стороне с пустыми руками или позволять себе быть обиженным. Из всего написанного люблю я только то, что пишется своей кровью. Пиши кровью: и ты узнаешь, что кровь есть дух. Я тролль?только пачка троллей осталась дальше мусолить эту тему. Как правило, такую ахинею несут только уклонисты от бана, покрашеные читеры и скамеры, итд, кому терять нечего. троллей
Это не доказывает что LVL F не прав. Твой подпольный бизнес мешает его подпольному бизнесу - классическая ситуация под названием "ебала жаба гадюку". Как правило, защиту на whataboutism'е строят действительно виновные. С первого момента я видел что Ратимов защищает себя только уклончиво и ad hominem. Но он не может атаковать мою репутацию.
Поставил пока тильду Ратимову, хотя его у меня в трасте до этого небыло. Мудрый. Это не входит в полномочия ДТ. Сие входит в полномочия ДТ: Мне врун Ратимов прислал ложный отрицательный отзыв. Он отомстил за мое предупреждение о торговых рисках для менеджерам кампаний подписей, которые не хотят платить за плагиат.
Сожжен звездой: Моя стрела помечает, попадает в мишень. Лауда бы назвала тебя хитрой. Я и есть не такой нежный: Я называю тебя хитровыебанной. [...]  |
|
|
|
Smartprofit, this topic is for the plagiarism case so you should probably stick to that. Maybe you can create a separate thread and list all his accomplishments on his behalf if you feel like defending him.
Yeah. I sort of hate to see Ratimov get banned, but if he plagiarized something then at the very least he deserves a temp or a signature ban--and that would only be if Theymos agreed that he deserved such lenient treatment. I think I've only seen one or two members get their accounts restored, so it's rare. It’s ironic that at this juncture, you mention theymos’ general hard line against plagiarism. For in the Russian Reputation topic, Ratimov is now claiming that theymos has answered this Meta topic (via global moderator request)—impliedly to his favour. I think that he is playing the language barrier, insofar as many of the Russian readers may not understand this discussion—unless they use Google Translate, of course! (Though every Russian will understand what I said to lovesmayfamilis—etc., etc.)Слоупок, он уже как 10 дней там горит, там уже ответили почти все, включая модеров и теймоса(через запрос глобала)А LVL F только рекомендует. С подключением. Ratimov claims that only trolls are interested in this hereby Meta topic—indeed, that only trolls say that what he did is plagiarism: Которые уже отписались там или просто прошли мимо? Слоупок. Там уже давно разобрались, что это под плагиат не записать, только пачка троллей осталась дальше мусолить эту тему. To my awareness, the only staff member who has commented publicly about Ratimov is Xal0lex, whose post on this topic was clearly wrong (as argued by myself and others in the ensuing pages). My discussion with mprep in the Rules thread, and mprep’s request for theymos’ opinion, was about the automated translation Rule #27, not the plagiarism rule; and it was a general question about the rules, not a specific question about the Ratimov case. (I also asked for a review of the plagiarism rule; but mprep declined to proceed with that.)It looks like Ratimov is making this up as he goes along.
I often spend hours of painstaking effort on one post. I know that some other high-merit users invest similarly.
It's obvious you do, though that tends to force other members to have to invest tons of time reading what you wrote, which I cannot consistently do I'm afraid. But that's a "me" problem and not a "you" one. No problem. I know that many of my posts about philosophy, history, art, culture, or politics may be, shall we say, “not of common interest”. It is why I mostly chose to list highly original posts on topics of interest to every reasonably intelligent reader of this forum: Bitcoin, and privacy. (To make some other points by the way, I started with a 2017 Bitcoin post that is very vitriolic toward Bcashers; and I added in a few DT/forum community classics.)That was not to brag about myself, but to illustrate why I care about this topic—and also to illustrate ScumBuster’s point, by contrast. The production of original work would neither justify nor excuse plagiarism; however, there is still a difference in degree between an occasional cheater (= bad), and one who substantially fakes his whole reputation with rip-offs of others’ work (= worse). Ratimov and his supporters claim that he is oh so great. Any monkey can copy and paste articles, with or without Google Translate. If Ratimov is such a great contributor to the community, really, please: Where are his high-quality original contributions? Will the Superhero Ratimov deign to treat us to a portfolio shortlist of his knowledgeable, in-depth original work, like the list that I easily provided for myself? I need not comment on what my list shows about Ratimov’s allegation that only trolls are interested in this Meta topic.
On its face, Ratimov’s post does blatantly violate (at least) Global Rule #27,
Yes, that was the connotation of my message. Literally the half of his Russian contribution is Google Translate copypasta which violates Rule #27. That Ratimov's rule#27- breaking-copypasta is so wide that it goes far beyond the scope of this thread and requires the new one filled in the details. I suggest that it’s unnecessary to proliferate threads about Ratimov. There should probably be a Reputation topic about his DT status; but making too many Meta topics about one person would dissipate the signal, and raise the noise. Neither helps lead to appropriate actions; and it would be inconvenient for people to follow multiple threads about Ratimov. I offer this advice to help the Newbie. If Ratimov is habitually breaking other forum rules, that is a Meta issue. Unless OP objects that it may dilute the focus of the topic on the most serious accusation of plagiarism, I propose that we should discuss that here. I have not had time to analyse his post history. Is Ratimov habitually spamming the Russian local with Google translations of others’ articles? If so, then even with attribution, that runs roughshod over the purpose of Global Rule #27; and it also violates the Russian local forum’s rule against “stuffing”, insofar as the posts are just copy-paste jobs. |
|
|
|
I confirmed (with a spot check, not word-by-word collation) that the post indeed matches Google Translate’s output. However, this one is clearly attributed at the top, and is therefore not plagiarism. It is a copy-paste, of course. But not plagiarism. “Aвтop” = ‘Author’; “Opигинaл” = ‘Original’I observe that this post was made on 2020-12-13, after this thread was raised on 2020-12-05. Ratimov’s citation is in a format more or less similar to what I myself suggested 2020-12-10; and he uses exactly the format for (human) translations that I suggested to wolwoo on 2020-04-17; thus, I certainly don’t call that plagiarism. (If it were the unattributed copy of a human translation published elsewhere, then it would be a plagiarism of the translation; I have recently begun to suspect that generally, there may be rampant plagiarism of translations by fake translators. But I think that the application of principle to automated translation tools is subtle, and not always so easy to answer. Ratimov’s abuse of Google Translate for his pretense of being a translator (!) to and from languages that he positively claims not to know (!!) is certainly fraudulent, dishonest, and untrustworthy; but is it plagiarism? I lean towards “yes” because he does it habitually, and oftentimes with the explicit claim that he is the translator. I think that the claim of being a translator pushes it over the line. Other cases may differ.) On its face, Ratimov’s post does blatantly violate (at least) Global Rule #27, and also the Russian local rule against “stuffing” that lovesmayfamilis so helpfully raised in the bitcoinst case (plus, perhaps, the rule against low-value posts). As mprep recently noted, moderators have discretion to apply the spirit of the rules, not merely the letter thereof; I appreciate this, and I do not suggest that rules should ever be applied mechanistically. However, if Ratimov does this frequently (let alone makes a career of it), then it clearly must be prohibited unless there are special rules just for him. The spirit of the rules is, after all, to stop sigspammers from making rank, merit, and money with negligible effort by flooding the forum with stuff they don’t actually produce, thus drowning out quality posts and reducing the quality of discussion for everyone. 27. Using automated translation tools to post translated content in Local boards is not allowed. Internal quotation expanded:Messages must be original. "Stuffing" the number of messages made by the copy-paste principle from another resource is unacceptable. Such messages fall under the first paragraph of the rules.
7. Cooбщeния дoлжны быть opигинaльными. "Haбивaниe" кoличecтвa cooбщeний cдeлaнныx пo пpинципy кoпи-пacтa c дpyгoгo pecypca нeдoпycтимo. Пoдoбныe cooбщeния пoдпaдaют пoд пepвый пyнкт пpaвил.
|
|
|
|
@nullius, perhaps my thoughts are even more evil. With enough merits I would give anyone the opportunity to try the posting in the Ratimov-style and get merit from me and, eventually, from others. But you don’t have enough merits? That is easy to fix: Apply for merit source privileges!For your application, choose some genuinely-faked-by Ratimov rip-offs that you feel deserve an extra +10 or +50 for creative original means of getting away with plagiarism. Stuff your application with some “stuffing” posts by bitcoinst (and all of his alts), to show that you are unbiased and you do not simply favour Ratimov. To show that you bear no grudges or ill-will toward anybody (and to gain political support from someone who will do anything for merits!), also include in your application the copy-paste for which lovesmayfamilis was previously banned. Soon, you will be the Superhero and “all-seeing source” of Newbies who spam the forum with plagiarised articles so that they can rank up, get bestest bounties.
I hope that everybody realizes that I am joking.I hope that I am joking. The way this thread is going, it may actually be the state of the forum. |
|
|
|
I already did similarly—but from an English-language article, and without the #Ratimov tag. Nice touch! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5298710.0It makes a good point, but I don’t want to encourage too much of this. —Well, maybe not. If Ratimov can build up his forum career with copy-pastes and Google Translate, then seriously, why shouldn’t others? wooI_Ioow is well on his way to becoming a merit source and DT1 with >3000 earned merits, and many opportunities! In my evil thoughts, I have also considered that perhaps I should write a script that auto-spams the forum with 10 or 20 or 500 copy-pasted articles per day—with an optional command-line switch for laundering through Google Translate. I would name the script ratimov, because Ratimov himself is such a script. If I were to upload ratimov to Github, it would be a service to Newbies who want to rank up their accounts, get bestest bounties. Is it not a Forum Virtue to help Newbies follow the exemplary achievements of the forum’s high-trust, high-merit users? 
Still waiting for links to knowledgeable posts Ratimov has made which aren't copy paste. Why does no one reply? Still no answer. Has Ratimov made any high-quality posts from his own original work!?Perhaps some people may not understand why this case invokes my wrath. But it should anger anyone who has spent considerable time and effort contributing original work to this forum. If I were asked the same question as ScumBuster has asked Ratimov, then I could simply point to my post history! I only make original posts! Want a short list selection? I just tried to pick ten of my own best posts almost at random, and wound up with eleven: - Re: Why do people hate segwit so much? (2017-12-04) 16 merits, even though this Newbie post was made almost two months before the start of the merit system. Original commentary in my own words, supported by a properly cited quotation of Greg Maxwell re ASICBOOST. Post #11 in my post history.
- One of my best-ever posts about privacy. (2017-12-06) This Newbie post also received some merits, even though it was made two months before merits existed. A fully original short essay, with some original ideas that I have never seen expressed anywhere else.
- Bitcoin’s Public-Key Security Level. (2018-01-31) One of my best-ever posts, in my own opinion. Fully original writing, except for one screenshot of a table from the SEC 2 standard (the document that defines secp256k1).
- A post about what standards of evidence should be applied by DT in forum disputes. Fully original writing (except for contextual reply quotes). (2020-02-05)
- Lauda is a WITCH, who cast an evil spell on me! BURN THE WITCH! (2018-02-18) An original satire that influenced theymos’ 2018 April Fool’s joke, and gave Lauda her final permanent avatar.
Note: I was gone from the forum between 2018-04-24 and 2020-01-01, and also from late May–late August 2020. - Project Anastasia: Bitcoiners Against Identity Theft. (2020-01-05) Not only original writing, but a highly original idea: The comparison of Craig Wright’s theft of Satoshi’s identity with the imposters who pretended to be Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova.
- [WO] The banking system doesn’t work (2020-09-18)
- [WO] Brainlaundering about “money laundering” (2020-09-21) A short “Emperor has no clothes!” style post pointing out a fallacy that I don’t see being discussed. Original thinking.
- [WO] Fungibility, Payjoin, and CoinSwap (2020-10-05) Mostly references or quotes other sources; but ties that together with my own commentary, explaining why this is important.
- Why privacy? — Re: Buying a domain (anonymously) using bitcoin (2020-10-28) Centred around properly sourced quotations of some jlopp material, but that is only to support my own commentary.
- Judge concurs with nullius: Keys = titular ownership (vs. beneficial ownership) (2020-11-25) Again! Not only do I use my own words, but I express my own original thinking, or at least independent thinking. To my knowledge, I am the first person ever to identify Bitcoin’s essential nature as a bearer asset, and thereupon to differentiate between titular ownership versus beneficial ownership—at least, I never saw anyone else say this before I did. (I first expressed this idea on 2020-01-19, as thereby self-quoted.)
Imagine what I personally invested here! Now, I feel cheated. For Ratimov to obtain social status, forum merits, DT1 power, and financial compensation by defrauding the public with rip-off posts, it is a slap in the face to anyone who has ever spent real time, effort, and virtù on this forum.It makes me wonder: Why did I ever waste my life contributing to this forum?Of course, I do not mean that to be about myself only. Other contributors, or potential contributors may reasonably feel the same way. This is damaging to the long-term health of the forum: Ratimov has shown that honest hard work is stupid. Hereby, we have the same problem: A generalized version of Gresham’s Law. The bad displaces the good. The result is a state of affairs in which the honest, the truthful ones, are considered the more stupid. It would end in the belief that it is better to have a share in the wrongdoing, than to stand by with empty hands or allow oneself to be wronged.
With due apologies to the gentleman who just started cursing at me under his breath. I realized long ago that this forum is not a place for gentlemen.i would consider it as bad taste. But such jokes is beyond of understanding of any westerner Ah, you are too much of a gentleman! Although nobody understands Russian humour, I hope that this is in somewhat better taste: “DT1 дива” lovesmayfamilis wants a Prada bag full of merrrritttss!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7xDfqSAdh0Must be viewed full-sized to be appreciated; lovesmayfamilis has my permission to use it as her desktop wallpaper (full HD, 1920x1080):  I should elaborate on something that English speakers may not understand from my prior post. In the post that I quoted, wherein lovesmayfamilis depicted Ratimov as Superman, she specifically praised him as a “всевидящий сорс”, ‘all-seeing source’. Whereas “сорс” is not even a native Russian word; it is a phonetic transliteration of “source” (compare “опен сорс”, ‘open source’). In the context of her post, lovesmayfamilis called Ratimov the all-seeing merit source who surely sees many of her own posts. Protip for plagiarists and copy-paste spammers: Get source status, and send many merits to lovesmayfamilis. She will defend your allegedly God- Mod-given right to copy and paste whole posts. But if you have not sent her hundreds of source merits, then she will demand that you should be banned!
And yeah, your try to accuse someone in hypocrisy will not work. Russians (in a a counterweight to ukrainians and belarusians) are well known for their "двoeмыcлиe". Alas—I always tell Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, sometimes the worst feuds are between brothers. I respect people from all these lands, although I understand why some of them have animosity toward each other. Anyway, no Russian can beat the Americans for “двoeмыcлиe”, at which Americans are history’s past-masters. This being an American forum, perhaps I should not have such high expectations for integrity. |
|
|
|
Please tell me what to do or in what topic I should write if I published a report on Ratimov and he left me an allegedly neutral negative review.
There is nothing to do. Neutral rating can be added for any reason. It doesn't harm you. If you think it's incorrect/unfair... well, that reflects poorly on Ratimov then. and if no one leaves him "Neutral feedback" then Ratimov will think that He got away with everything and will continue to leave false feedback. Of course, suchmoon will defend poison-pen feedback that is “neutral” in form, but negative in substance. She herself has a habit of issuing outright defamatory “neutral” feedback. Most infamously, she accused a decent forum member of being the alt of “a well-known scammer”—vaguely, without evidence, in “neutral” trust feedback. This caused serious harm to that person’s reputation; it started rumours that snowballed through gossip, until all the herd-mentality types just knew it to be true. I don’t want to delve into that here, because that person has explicitly tried to avoid Reputation drama; but if you dig around a bit, you will see whereof I speak. (And suchmoon should be the last person to complain about vague accusations brought without evidence.)Don’t just take my word for it. Do your own research.You can try creating a new thread in Reputation so that we can stop derailing this one, and recommend excluding Ratimov from trust lists, but I don't see that getting much support on the basis of one neutral rating.
Ratimov also left me a retaliatory red tag, a classic butthurt whine—after I left him negative trust feedback with evidence of business/trade-risk issues of interest to signature campaign managers, who may not want to be scammed into paying him to spam the forum with plagiarised articles laundered through Google Translate.
Are you serious? You are the "captain obvious", Since when is posting evidence of plagiarism considered shitpost and trolling? Timelord2067 has multiple tags (including my own) for his trolling. My suggestion is to not pay too much attention to his nonsense. He is so cracked that he once accused Lauda and marlboroza of being alts—well, that is not as stupid as some people’s accusation that I am Lauda’s alt. (Just wait till you are accused of being my alt, and then you will have first-hand knowledge of how foolish these “people” are.)Protip: When Timelord uses the thumbs-down  message icon for one of his posts, it means that the post will definitely get a thumbs-down from anyone who is moderately intelligent and/or sane.
airfinex, you won the respect of some serious people for presenting evidence against Ratimov. Whether or not you are really a “Newbie”, it is obvious that you do not have experience navigating these ridiculous Meta and Reputation fights. My advice: - This discussion is off-topic here. Please direct any complaints about Ratimov’s bad tags to the Reputation forum.
- But you should not expect any kind of “justice”, or whatever. I don’t bother complaining about his stupid retaliatory red tag against me, as you can see; the only reason for me to do so is my mild curiosity about what other DTs will say about his trust system abuse. Surely, they will not be hypocrites?
- It may be productive to start a more general thread in Reputation, discussing whether or not Ratimov should be in DT. His plagiarism is a Meta issue, for two reasons: It should invoke staff action, and he is a merit source. His untrustworthy judgment and his trust system abuse are purely Reputation issues. I do suggest that right or wrong, as a practical matter, such a thread needs more impact than “oh no, he left a bad tag”. There are many such threads—some right, some wrong—to gain traction, a thread either needs to be very well-prepared, or needs to have pre-existing support from someone popular. (If a thread is made by someone popular, it will take off like a rocket even if it is only juvenile trash talk.)
- Understand that DT has all the refined dignity and intelligence of a schoolyard fight between children who want to be the most popular. There are (or have been) a few smart and judicious DTs, but not many... Set your expectations accordingly.
- If you are using this account to express yourself on controversial issues without fear of retaliation against your “main account”, then do it! Why do you care if Ratimov scribbles on your trust wall here? Do you intend to use this account for trading, or to enroll it in signature campaigns? Focus on your goals—and over time, others will see if your goals are honest. Remember always that in the eyes of anyone who has even the least bit of wisdom, reputation is hard to win, and easy to lose.
- I suggest using more professional language; and always stick to what you started with under this account: The evidence. It will drive certain parties crazy if you show that you are right, and they look foolish dismissing you as a “troll”.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
