Yes!  I mean no.  I mean, thank you?

One of my neighbors is a retired SFPD lieutenant, in his late 50's, gym rat, black belt in three martial arts, and queer as a three dollar bill.  There's no doubt in my mind anyone who underestimates that "pussy" would have his ass handed to him before he time to be surprised. 

I have a good friend who lives on Lincoln, right across the street from the park.  He walks out to his truck in his goulashes and changes his shoes before climbing behind the wheel...  No fucking joke.  Believe me I'm familiar with the capitol of liberal cesspools.  I live in the county just north of the city, were the rich liberals live, and don't tolerate plebe poop in the streets.  I'm one of the 7 registered Not Democrats in the whole fucking county.


It keeps me from going insane.



Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and again.  

Golden Gate Park?

What a day, emotions run high, pumps, shorts, take it the shorts, dip, buy the dip...  I earned 0.0035BTC.  Better than a sharp stick in the eye.

Holly body slam, Bat Man!  I'm buying the dip! 

Spreading homophobia is abusive.  If you want you can go flag, flog, or fapfap yourself for that.

Don't be, I think I'd rather be wrong.  It was only 0.08BTC.  Whoooohoooooo!

Damn, I should have been more bullish about the pump.  BTC is trading for $13.3k right now on binance.  I set my buy order for $11.5k, which might be too bearish for the slump.

When time travel?

I'm trying my hand at trading today.  I seem to really really suck it it but you only live once.  I sent the contents of my hot wallet (~0.08BTC) to binance and set a limit order for $12,950, BTC to USDT.  I have a feeling we're going to see $13k sometime today, probably just for a blip and then suffer a small correction, maybe even below $11k.

Am I crazy or what?

I do take it seriously, but I left that review before I was on DT1.  Also, the date I left the review should be considered.    But of course you're right, I shouldn't be using the system for clowning around.


I vehemently disagree wit this.  Thule has proven himself to take a personal vendetta against forum members way too seriously and way too far.  I've done several trades on this forum for physical goods and PayPal, each time exposing my real name (which is uncommon,) and, in some cases my address.  Thule's propensity to dox those with whom he's taken issue puts those people at risk.  Anyone who deals with Thule in those ways can very easily suffer financial or physical risk.  I highly encourage people to avoid any dealings with him.  He may not scam one directly, but he very likely may put a member or his family in danger.

Then there's the defamation itself, which is a type of scam.  Thule convinced me to remove his red-tag once, and then he went on a bigger libelous rant including posting a photo which may have actually been that of a forum member and her family.  There's no fucking way I could ever trust a shithead like that, and I believe no one should.  That red-tag will remain.



I tend to agree; the rigidity of the word permanent is probably a bit extreme, people can change.  When I first arrived here I was puzzled by your trust rating since you do seem to be an established and contributing member of the forum, and take proactive steps to expose scammers.  I did a little research and found the reasons for the negative reviews are based on the community's aversions to account sellers.  I don't recall you denying those accusations, let alone disproving them.  Selling accounts can only serve to counter-act the efforts you make to stop scammers.  Your actions can (which appear to be true,) and likely do put the community at risk.

Again, your position on my exclusion list isn't personal, but I do feel it's better position for the overall health of the community.

At the risk of multi posting, I think responding to @Timelord2067 deserves it's own post.  Although I value the work you've done to expose alternate accounts, which is a tremendous help in exposing scammers, I think your judgement can be flawed at times.  

This:

...is big part of it.  The tit-for-tat attitude is akin to retaliatory feedback.  I don't remember when I excluded you but it could have been around the time that you made this post.  It gave reasons to believe you are not a good judge of character.  The way you reacted to me referring to that post as trolling was also a bit over the top, in my opinion.

Many times while discussing the trust system and custom trust lists I've mentioned that my exclusions should not be considered as a personal affront.  My list is solely based on whether I value your list, and your judgment in its construction.  I can still see the benefit you provide to the community, and value your contributions to the discussions here, even if you're in my exclusions.  In your case I see a lot of value as a contributing member.

To point to an extreme example, look at QS.  I quite enjoy bantering with him about a verity of subjects, we even tend to agree more often than not when it comes to politics.  And I often enjoy some of his contributions to discussions, whether we agree or not.  But, rest assured he's earned a permanent spot on my exclusion list.  

I can't argue with that logic, and looking back my public behavior in that it thread I do feel some shame.  In my defense I did PM Csmiami 23 seconds after I made this post telling him that I would send the money back (minus tx fees.)  I should have been more responsible in public, and shouldn't have needed DarkStar_ to point out that out.



This is also a very good point, and I was putting things into a narrow minded perspective due to the amount.  Integrity shouldn't depend on amount; $3 is essentially one 24oz Coors Light to me (which my waistline will attest I can live without,) but could be someone else's daily wages.  Thank you for your feedback, Steamtyme, it is really helpful.



I agree.  The fact that he PM'd the two of us to ask our advice is commendable, but I also think he should be more careful with other people's money.  Even if that individual is a fuckstick.

@Csmiami,
I've removed my review and my support of the flag.  I wish this situation could have transpired differently, but at least it ended without anyone being hurt.  I hope you don't harbor any hard feelings, If I or anyone else had treated a newbie this way, even if he is trying to scam, I would expect the same outcome.  Scamming a scammer doesn't make you any different.

I was recently promoted to DT1.  I didn't ask for it, but I take the responsibility seriously.  If any of you believe my reviews, flags, inclusions, or exclusions are out of line, please feel free to discuss it here.

---

The reason I'm creating this thread right now is because I just left a negative rating for member Csmiami due to his handling of this situation.  I had originally left him a neutral review, but after consideration I decided a negative review is warranted.

KYC doesn't cut it.  Come up with valid collateral or lock this thread.  There are plenty of members who'll red-tag your account just for making this request.

I don't believe you mentioned suchmoon or her suggestion in the PM you sent to me.  If you're insinuating suchmoon suggested you let ArmandoComellas twist in the wind for a couple of days before sending his money back, I could see her making a comment like that off the cuff.  I wouldn't take it literally, though.  It seems kind of cruel, and I think suchmoon would agree. 

Sure, ArmandoComellas is an annoying spammer and a would be scammer, that's obvious.  He came here looking for a battle of the wits completely unarmed.  There's some satisfaction in making people like him suffer for a little while, but I don't see the point in letting it drag out. 

If you're serious about your lending business then you want to earn the reputation of being professional.  Letting personal squabbles interfere with that can't be good for business.  Just my two sats, for what it's worth.

I agree, that's quite harsh.  Not to derail this thread, but there's risk and there's risk.  As a lender I would have no doubts about lending 0.1BTC to bob123, but that's me.

As I said in the other thread, I can see both sides of the issue with LFC's review of the OP.  I certainly wouldn't lend to the OP, but at the same time I wouldn't red-tag him.  The wording of a negative review; You think that trading with this person is high-risk applies in this case.  LFC is entitled to his opinion, and entitle to use the trust system to express that opinion.

I think you're mistaking normal for humorless, they are not synonymous.  It's quite normal to have a twisted sense of humor, just look at POTUS for a perfect example.

Csmiami sent me a PM to inform me how this event transpired, and asked what he should do.  I suggested the exact same thing quoted above.

My statements in this thread are purely in jest, and I hope that was obvious.  Of course I would not condone Csmiami keep the funds, or even spend them in any other way regardless how noble the cause.


@Csmiami, you said:


If you are reffering to this:


I don't think suchmoon believes that's actually gonna happen, and I get the feeling she was being facetious.  If you haven't sent ArmandoComellas' funds back to him yet I think it's about time you do.