Marlboroza should not be in any sane person's trust list who knows what type of abuse they support and even do as noted in this thread itself. Anyone trusting them is supporting groupism and mobbing here overall and is against neutral and unbiased judgement. Get me out of DT1 ! LoL !  Here is the real list of marlboroza's filthy enablers (current DT1 who have included him, plus me): Balthazar Vod Foxpup Avirunes suchmoon JayJuanGee Royse777 LoyceV actmyname SFR10 TwitchySeal xtraelv crwth nullius KTChampions tvplus006 gospodin witcher_sense Alex_Sr morvillz7z Coolcryptovator lovesmayfamilis DireWolfM14 TalkStar 1miau YOSHIE Hmm... one of them you even have included in your own trust list. Better run this by the Objective Standards Guild to see how it fits in with your prescribed principles. You claim you misspelled it - I think it was trust abuse.  Could be... To think I was sitting next to him in the Clown Car all this time, and I was actually riding in the trunk... |
|
|
|
This is very hasty. You don't even know for sure that the funds did not end up in the hands of the family. And your flag is based on incorrect premises: I have just seen this thread and discovered Bruno is alive and kicking.
No, you didn't "discover" he was "alive and kicking." That can only mean he scammed me when I donated personal funds (and Known Alts funds) to his "Plead" to cover funeral costs. No, that's not what that means, at all. If Bruno is not dead then the funds were taken under false pretences.
That's a big impossible IF. Given the various obituaries and public outpourings of grief by his family members on social media, I would say he most certainly is dead. What's funny is I explicitly told you that sending your Known Alts donations funds was NOT a good idea, but you did it anyway. Now you opened a bullshit flag over it. You have an astounding ability to overlook reason and common sense to make the most unreasonable of connections. You even still have "Probably Bruno" written as a neutral feedback in cryptohunter's trust history. Phinnaeus Gage needs a flag on his account but this isn't the proper way to do it. I was going to oppose it but I changed my mind, seeing as how it would be a shame if anybody actually donated to the hacker's address. I have opened a Type 1 flag on his account which is based on Hakorede's thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1916 |
|
|
|
I'm not a CSW minion, but according to them:
Those addresses are included in a list of addresses provided to the court by Ira Kleiman. The addresses were not provided by CSW. Therefore, the post proves nothing.
When people were discussing the early coins that were moved recently, I saw a post on reddit that explained that CWS basically presented a list of coins and said that some of them are in this tulip trust, but he's not sure which. ... No, that's not what happened. The addresses were provided by Craig and stated to be his bitcoin holdings. They were what the famous "Bonded Courier" delivered to him in January, and what Craig submitted to the plaintiff's attorneys. There's no way Ira Kleiman's lawyers are going to forge an exhibit. They are not Craig, after all -- they are real attorneys. You can follow the court records yourself. I went into detail about it here. |
|
|
|
|
Very sad.
I see that the "new" Bruno's donation address has already received 5 BTC. I hope nobody actually sent him BTC already. But if not, it means this is some sort of experienced bitcoiner who had access to 5 BTC, to move it to the donation address to make it look like he was already receiving donations.
I was really hoping his account wouldn't end up this way.
|
|
|
|
How do I get on this list?
For some reason TS grabbed a relatively ancient version of marlboroza's included by list and used it as the basis for his new list. So I don't know, its a mystery. I can't believe I never had marlboroza in my trust list. I must have misspelled his name when I originally set up my list a long time ago. What an embarrassing oversight. |
|
|
|
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_Core[/url]
Does version 0.3.9 still communicate with the current Bitcoin network? Yes.
Does version 0.3.9 communicate with the BCH or BSV forks? No.
Define 'communicate with'. My keys generated under 0.3.9 spend just fine on BCH and BSV networks. "Communicate" means a back-and-forth interaction. Sweeping old private keys is a 1-way interaction. Satoshi-era builds sync to the current Bitcoin blockchain*; BCH and BSV clients do not. * The Bitcoin software from satoshi syncs the current bitcoin chain (well, until it hits a bug with blocks over 500k, but if you fix that it keeps on syncing).
BSV OTOH is full of shitcoin features like the broken oscillating difficulty adjustment. Satoshi's (the real one, not your apparently drug addled maniac pretender) software rejects that stuff with a quickness.
|
|
|
|
Alright I am annoyed and saddened and really fucking tired. Also down to just one merit, but I will give it to the best youngster, newbie or kid who can write a decent - short will do fine - riposte to the kindergarten shit that is happening over here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5248291.msg54499261#msg54499261Of course I have sympathy for our fallen ex-member mindrust who has gone back 5 years in his understanding of bitcoin, but please do your best to put cobra at least in his place, the beginners and help section. Meh. Cobra just being edgy for the sake of presenting some edge. As is their wont. When's the last time you honestly valued their opinions? JJG should feel honored that they actually read his entire response though. |
|
|
|
Calvin already playing D, trying to confuse people into thinking these addresses were taken from the Shadders list (they were not; they were taken from the list submitted to court by Craig as given to him by the Mysterious Bonded Courier™). BTW, its his birthday today. What a great present.  "You know what happens when you lie in a court? You know the maximum penalty in this country for perjury? It's about 20 years. Great! I'm going to be in court.. Prove it in court -- you get to send me to jail for 20 years." - CSW Wish granted. |
|
|
|
Please just put hv_ on Ignore. I've had him there for a while now; it feels right. We all know what he's going to say well before he does -- no need to bother responding to his simple-minded trollery as he never has anything new to offer. And the most amazing thing about all of this is - not one BSVtard will be turned.
Craigy could break down their door, sit on their face, mash his phallus and scrotum in their gaping maw as the clinkers rain down shrieking 'I'm a liar. It was all horseshit' and all they'll gasp is '4D chess, dude' and give the thumbs up as his bowels let go.
Why is it that whenever you write something I have to visualize it? |
|
|
|
|
LOL. Adam Back looks like he's never held a piece of pizza before in his life.
|
|
|
|
Now CSW will sue the blockchain
I just hope it's one step closer now to him being fucked in the ass by the courts; he's been a stain for far too long. Were any of these coins that he was claiming were his? I checked the first 5 addresses: all in Craig's list submitted to court! I expanded on the matter here. |
|
|
|
100 2009 addresses have all just signed the same message. "Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud. He doesn't have the keys used to sign this message. The Lightning Network is a significant achievement. However, we need to continue work on improving on-chain capacity. Unfortunately, the solution is not to just change a constant in the code or to allow powerful participants to force out others. We are all Satoshi" https://paste.debian.net/plain/1148565Does anyone know if any of these addresses are on his fanfic address list? I certainly hope so. Well the first 5 are all there... Let's take #5 as an example: 1MN82eH1Eu3hznewHFkfsAajknhj78Uup5, found in the above PDF. Message verifies with signature.Document 512, Exhibit 7: ...Wright also provided Plaintiffs with DEF_01586024, a list of 16404 public addresses he claimed were his list of bitcoin holdings (“CSW Filed List”) He can't wriggle out of this one except by saying the list was generated without his knowledge... Which is likely what he will do. Edit: more specifically, this is the court document accompanying the list submitted in January, as referenced above: CRAIG WRIGHT’S NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH COURT’S JANUARY 10, 2020 ORDER
Dr. Craig Wright files this Notice of Compliance with this Court’s Order dated January 10, 2020 [D.E. 373]. Specifically, Dr. Wright notifies the Court that a third party has provided the necessary information and key slice to unlock the encrypted file, and Dr. Wright has produced a list of his bitcoin holdings, as ordered by the Magistrate Judge, to plaintiffs today.
Dated: January 14, 2020 |
|
|
|
Looks like to me theymos can't afford to ban users anymore.
Maybe he needs the little bit of activity even if it is coming from multi-accounters/cheaters. Not talking about lauda in particular. There are also ban evaders wandering around freely.
At the risk of going OT, I don't think banning individual users has much effect on forum traffic. Even now, there's over 11,000 unique users browsing the forum during any given week. While this number is way down from Dec 2017 (maybe 80%), total impressions from ads are down less than 50%. The forum seems to have reached a low point in activity in March, and is slowly rebounding. |
|
|
|
Easy to say. I am seeing jobs with 100-130 applicants in first day, few hours even.
Yikes, that's brutal. Good luck to you and don't give up applying. Maybe you can separate yourself from the herd by writing in your application cover letter about how you can spruce up their business through adopting Bitcoin. Or don't. I don't know. Maybe that's a horrible idea. |
|
|
|
These are attempts to distract attention from the the main meaning - plagiarism. They will lie again and again, order linguistic expertise, and so on. But the fact remains that this is PLAGIARISM! Some are truly useful for the forum users have been permanently banned for over a fewer number of plagiarism.
I agree: cryptohunter should definitely be banned for plagiarism. Are you unknowingly misrepresent the meaning of the words I was talking about? Or do you do it knowingly? Use google translate to read my signature. You could just as easily be talking about cryptohunter, who also clearly engaged in plagiarism and has yet to be punished. |
|
|
|
Oh my, that's so horrifying that I sent you a merit and am sharing it to my Trump memes thread. |
|
|
|
Cryptohunter was only wasting his time copy and pasting this proof someone made
OK so thanks for admitting cryptohunter (you) engaged in plagiarism. I knew you had a sensible side, glad I took you off ignore just to read this one post. These are attempts to distract attention from the the main meaning - plagiarism. They will lie again and again, order linguistic expertise, and so on. But the fact remains that this is PLAGIARISM! Some are truly useful for the forum users have been permanently banned for over a fewer number of plagiarism.
I agree: cryptohunter should definitely be banned for plagiarism. |
|
|
|
If my memory serves me well, it was reported in 2018. Yes, that's when it was first referenced in this thread by ScumBuster. Not sure how many people reported it. I don't think a reminder to the mods would be bad as its still plagiarism. Anybody want to make the case that its not? I'm open to reasonable discussion of the matter as to how I could be mistaken. |
|
|
|
Saw this article today, thought the results were a bit surprising, with the exception of their choice for #1: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29180831/ranking-2020-nfl-offseasons-worst-first-barnwell-all-32-teamsHere's the full list to save you some time, but the whole article is an interesting read: How each organization did during the player-acquisition period, from best to worst:1. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 2. Cleveland Browns 3. Denver Broncos 4. Indianapolis Colts 5. Dallas Cowboys 6. Buffalo Bills 7. Miami Dolphins 8. Arizona Cardinals 9. New Orleans Saints 10. Los Angeles Chargers 11. Washington Redskins 12. Cincinnati Bengals 13. New York Jets 14. New York Giants 15. Las Vegas Raiders 16. San Francisco 49ers 17. Philadelphia Eagles 18. Baltimore Ravens 19. Minnesota Vikings 20. Pittsburgh Steelers 21. Kansas City Chiefs 22. Atlanta Falcons 23. Jacksonville Jaguars 24. Carolina Panthers 25. Tennessee Titans 26. Seattle Seahawks 27. Green Bay Packers 28. Los Angeles Rams 29. Detroit Lions 30. New England Patriots 31. Chicago Bears 32. Houston Texans |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
