@Scammer8:

Please amend your post by using the Submission Form in the OP to provide links to the various users' UID details.

I would also appreciate it if you could expand on your information to walk us through your findings.

Thanks.

Many thanks for your work as the campaign manager - I have received my funds and updated the trust feedback that I have left for you.  Best wishes and thank-you.

BitCoinTalk went dark once before for a few weeks months.

I think if it went offline again I'd catch up on my sleep (and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one)

So you're looking for sixteen people to create between them a total of 80 new threads (every week) and then keep coming back to those threads week after week to effectively necro bump them if they are not popular.  (Mods delete posts if the same poster posts days apart without any other poster participating, so you'll end up with participants posting "quality" posts only to have those posts deleted because no one else has posted.).


Might want to re-think how your campaign is conducted.

[quote author=Thule link=topic=5106712.msg53958686#msg53958686 date=1583270069]
[size=7pt]Somebody deleted link to suchmoons adress which she claimed to be wrong and which is publicly accessable based on her request ?     

Anyone abused or scammed by suchmoon can PM me and will get a link to her full adress and her picture for free.[/size]
[/quote]

Interesting that you would use a real email address for a throwaway UID



(and that you don't have any crayons to write down said password)

---

---

Also interesting are your two spelling mistakes:


From a preliminary search, in all of BCT I can find just one other instance of those two spelling mistakes being made:


[quote author=lovesybitz link=topic=2942080.msg40006639#msg40006639 date=1528872540]
Well when I read their it says that they want to make a secure storage for peoples money and easy accessable for every user when he wants to

remove his crypto from our platform. We Will be looking to partner up with many sellers which will be implemented into our network and u will be

able to buy anything u need for everyday life with ur SCE tokens, we tend to make a platform similar to some higly recognised platforms and make

a ranking based system, where people will rate sellers on a 5 star system, also sellers will deliver their products to buyers on their home adress via

mail.
[/quote]

lovesybitz has the same type style as Thule, one line separating each line of text.

Although the original post has been deleted [Archive [1a], [1b]] the perpetrator of that spelling mistake ( lovesybitz ) has been banned.

---

---

Perhaps someone else can delve deeper into more connections to cross-verify if Thule is an alt of the banned UID lovesybitz?

Many thanks for running this signature campaign - I see the fund have landed and are being confirmed.

Regards,

Believe me, I don't want to attack anybody.  Let's all move on.

---

---

I see there has been an alteration/modification overnight:


Most recognised goes past the initial 1,000 ranks - perhaps post 1,000 gets black while 101 - 1,000 gets a grey/gun metal colour?

The OP says the funding wallet held by hacker1001101001 1JAYESHqohMYvXS4Do6ZNEYJiwZ588MVKi still has BTC 0.00215469 of funds still being held.

Three questions,

• What is the total being owed for the Earnbet campaign week six?
  
  (See below)
• What (and who are they on BitCoinTalk?) has Earnbet said about the shortfall?
• Can we get a portion of what is owed, with a percentage bonus given when the full funds have been provided by EarnBet?
  
  e.g. we are paid 20-25% of what we are owed, however when we are paid, we are paid the full amount. (i.e. we are paid 125% of what is owed)

*edit* Have just looked at the spread-sheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NJvwgDF4XHIe7sP9PZxv8PPXCfrQZBViDwW3fpFiunc/edit#gid=1530850210 and it says the eight of us are owed a total of BTC 0.00845 - the amount in the 1JAYS wallet is ~ 25% of that amount.

---

---

Screen shot in case the spreadsheet goes missing:

---

---

Hopefully the others in the signature campaign are watching and will offer other suggestions.  I will go along with the consensus of the owed participants.

---

---

Just OT - I am in the Blender signature campaign now - https://blender.io/ - what signature campaigns are everyone else in?

Hmm, awkward:


Actually no.  You're narrative is easy to prove as a false narrative by quoting the actual post:


As everyone can see I said there was a glitch in the system, nothing more.  Your wanting something to be true doesn't excuse what you said about me is not true.  You know what you said about me is not true therefore it is a lie.

I call you out. (feel free to start a "Timelord2067 Vs (your name here)" tread - everyone else does....

Next.

[quote author=NeuroticFish link=topic=5224821.msg53956898#msg53956898 date=1583252455]
I think that I've found a bug.
If an user is Ignored, although the proper settings are there in the extension, the extra info is not shown (for example "Banned") in a discussion thread.
[/quote]

Confirmed it happens - not sure it is a bug as such.

Thank you for your acknowledgement.  I'm just on my way to work and will check out your link after I get home.

Regards,

Maybe you should read what I just wrote - they don't include it in the calculations.

So @Vod, how they hanging?

Here's the thing...

@suchmoon and @ibminer have shifted the goal posts.  They show the "Most Merited (includes initial merit)" score on a users' profile, BUT they use the "Most earned merit (after initial merit)" rankings to calculate the most recognised score.

https://bpip.org/report.aspx?r=earnedmerit

andulolika is not on this list therefore ((1,000+1,000+1,000)/3) is still 1000.

---

---

Perhaps you can get out of them ( @suchmoon and @ibminer  ) why they shifted the goal-posts yet show the skewered information as they had a negative reaction when I asked them then ramped it up when I showed them a work in progress.

---

---

@andulolika doesn't make the grade the way things are now.

If it's resolved then the best thing you can do at this point is to lock the thread (lower left of page) to prevent necro-posting and off topic posts going forward.

If you have need to reopen the thread (should the situation require) then you can always unlock the thread (lower left again), edit the OP and add a new post to bump the thread to gain people's attention.

[quote author=truth or dare link=topic=5210651.msg53952087#msg53952087 date=1583190714]
The incontrovertible truth is probably the type of echo one should not complain about. There are no cookies for. those who support scammers or try to inhibit their removal from the trust system. There is only a chance not to be a pariah once the scamming trust abusing core are removed.
[/quote]

Possibly, but when users such as Lauda (or, to answer your comment) suchmoon go on a distrust spree:


you should be asking why you are encouraging them with your -<echo chamber>-?

---

---

At least a couple of these UID's are from the same geographical location (see if you can figure out where they are from by their profile names).

One "Gang" trying to pick off another "gang"

As I update my thread tracking Lauda's Fake Flags I will, from now on, be naming those who are supporting Lauda's fake flags:

---

---

Might need to turn the -<Echo chamber>- down a little bit before you start offering cookies.

You're not supposed to add your PN7 another account's tally to your own...

Update on one of the flags created by Lauda:

[quote author=Timelord2067 link=topic=5193695.msg53406661#msg53406661 date=1576971088]Flag 712: whoeier starts a scam accusation against four users in 2018.  Much later, Lauda creates just one flag against jamalaezaz, but not against other three. Five days after thread started (8th January 2018) whoeier updates the OP and writes that "Iam2Good( also represented Visale ) and myself have found an solution to this. In my opinion this is resolved." so Flag should be withdrawn by Lauda as the issue was resolved a year before flags were created.  Lauda was a part of thread and therefore aware of this in 2018.[/quote]

Lauda is even aware (back in 2018) that there was no scam being undertaken by jamalaezaz:

Archive [1a], [1b]

[quote author=iam2good link=topic=2681942.msg27643377#msg27643377 date=1515325653]
[quote author=Lauda link=topic=2681942.msg27641333#msg27641333 date=1515323303]
[quote author=iam2good link=topic=2681942.msg27640672#msg27640672 date=1515322506]
Jamal and Avirunes did not scam me, they simply did not do the work i asked them to do and when i pointed out the proof that they do not do their work and i will not pay them they never  argue with me because i am right and until today none of them receive a penny from me.
[/quote]
Could you provide proof of this? Jamal has been ripe for a negative rating for a very long time.
[/quote]
When i want to start the bounty i contacted Avirunes and Avirunes told me he cannot handle the bounty alone but willl contact Jamal so they can do it together and when i make the payment then they will split it together. For this reason, i never communicated with Jamal but with Avirunes. See the QUOTES from our communication below:
[/quote]

As you can see Lauda has a vendetta against jamalaezaz by focusing on him and not avirunes.  jamalaezaz was in effect a sub-contractor to avirunes, yet there is no flag that has ever been created against avirunes or the others named.  When will theymos take action?

---

---

Although jamalaezaz slid down a very slippery slope back in circa late 2017/early 2018 creating a fake flag against jamalaezaz is not the way to move forward.

jamalaezaz appears to be trying to make himself a productive member of the community once more and the guy who created this fake flag (Lauda) is simply passing jamalaezaz the other way on the murky slippery slope.

---

---

https://bpip.org/flag.aspx?id=712

---

---

Comment:

@sabotag3x , @JollyGood , @robelneo , @ChuckBuck , @Enre , @rhomelmabini , @RBF , @bobitza , @ScamViruS are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda

---

IN flag 1260 https://bpip.org/flag.aspx?id=1260 Lauda has created a fake flag against user andulolika who started a thread called:

Using trust rating for a death threat TMAN, foxpup and lauda.

Lauda's falg cites the thread as "evidence" of their flags proof, yet andulolika started the thread to talk about TMAN, foxpup and Lauda.

The flag is therefore invalid.


Comment:

@TMAN , @TheUltraElite , @joksim299 , @AlexSimion , @nullius are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda

Someone seems to have it in for the Chipmixer website.

A couple of weeks ago there was a fake Chipmixer banner that had been created in a seriously Butt Hurt ^TM thread, then a couple of days ago another signature modification occurred as mentioned in this thread:

Copycat Signatures: Chipmixer and Wasabi

As yet there doesn't seem to be any connection other than the two acts of plagiarism and the fake website are levelled at ChipMixer.

For now we should all be vigilant for other occurrences.

Didn't I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that be.open and sne.su are alts? Perhaps these are bumping another shill account?