Inbound channel is 0.01 so should be good... 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
|
|
|
|
Another Info: TheBitcoinExplorer is his alt. I will also state here the accounts connected to him, as far as I remembered he told me about that. Connected to User: Ararbermas
intoy_victor
Koro-SenseiEvidence: User Daboy_Lyle just named those account as his relatives (maybe an alt) Source:Messenger (Convo) Is there any proof for the connection between those accounts ? He didn't answer six days ago when I asked: @cabalism13 - other than the user saying other UID's are his/her alts, is their any independent proof of this?
|
|
|
|
I've funded my Eclair again, I'll try different paths next time.
I've now got four channels on each of my three devices, so I'll try again with the only one that has an incoming channel.
lnbc1pwh2vk2pp50qj48fd3xzg9h5s5tj2uh3dj9xa0qu9v7686n880fssmg938t8sqdqu2fhkzmtfdenjqnzwyptkzmrvv46qxqr4rqrzjqwryaup9lh50kkranzgcdnn2fgvx390wgj5jd07rwr3vxeje0glc7z89q5qqssqqqqqqqqlgqqqqqeqqjqrzjqw2sxwe993h5pcm4dxzpvttgza8zhkqxpgffcrf5v25nwpr3cmfg7z80dyqq2cqqqqqqqqlgqqqqqeqqjqrzjqwxtjcva9yaumdy42vxws7p32n9ljqj4ch9v58t2mtl77hh8lzrzvzgwlgqqszqqqqqqqqlgqqqqqeqqjqrzjqfs04d3nqehd0vwehxu2p7kg0c2hn5tsn6r5629q69c6rawy8wu8wzgr6qqqsjsqqqqqqqlgqqqqqeqqjq38jt8u508v98hqckpdscj55vdlha9p7nm4zdfjst8wz7udx2rq9p23wx5t8f5uu25q6hy7n54l7sywn9xeuu6kcknsamr7870j0j6ngqhvlkya
(Adding a 4th channel is a bit redundant as it doesn't have the inbound on it as yet) |
|
|
|
I have created my own flag against him. I think there is nothing I can do with it. I will just accept it that he defaulted the loan. I have created a flag against him and I chose the 3rd option. Can somebody verify it if I did the correct thing? Thanks  Will lock this thread after verifying if what I did is correct. Looks valid to me. Here's the flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=717If you lock the thread, the Flag becomes invalid. |
|
|
|
sounds like the path finding with Eclair and/or Zap isn't working. Either that or you're making some mistake or other. If you look at the Lightning network graph, it's well connected, so there shouldn't be more than maximum 8-12 hops to find the longest route (and the average route length will be lower than that)
All three aren't working? What would be the odds of that? Given that I have made and received payments I'm not sure what mistake you might be thinking I've made. Failed attempts try ten times and come back with "unable to find path..." The payments are ~ $1 and are funded for the TX fees. |
|
|
|
So the [ Flag] is pretty simple, there are numerous Red Trust Wall notes about COINMAN1 u=911630 scamming and there are outstanding scam accusations. Although coinman1 was Last Active: 16 August 2019, 15:52:30, the last actual post was on the 23 March 2018, 07:59:11. I don't believe that "coinman1" is necessarily in control of the account. Here's why: https://www.coindesk.com/25-year-old-to-plead-guilty-to-running-unlicensed-crypto-exchange [Archive] 25-Year-Old Bitcoin Seller Faces Life Sentence for Unlicensed ExchangeByline: Wolfie Zhao Aug 26, 2019 at 06:00 UTC Updated Aug 26, 2019 at 11:06 UTC A 25-year-old man from Westwood, Los Angeles, has plead guilty to federal charges for having exchanged up to $25 million in cash and crypto without a license and anti-money laundering program.
Kunal Kalra, also known as “Kumar,” “shecklemayne” and “coinman,” was indicted on Friday for allegedly trading cash and crypto for individuals including drug dealers, partially via his bitcoin ATM kiosk.
An announcement from the U.S. Justice Department last Friday said Kalra, who is expected to make his first court appearance next month, has agreed to plead guilty to the charges.
The release alleges Kalra ran an unlicensed crypto exchange business from May 2015 through October 2017. He admitted in his plea deal for having exchanged bitcoin for cash from criminals including drug dealers who obtained the cryptocurrency from selling narcotics on the darknet.
The justice department went on to say that without implementing an anti-money laundering program, Kalra facilitated such type of transactions with a commission while knowing the proceeds came from drug trafficking.
As part of the investigation, the law enforcement seized about $889,000 in cash from Kalra and about 54.3 bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, worth more than half-million dollars. The announcement said the maximum penalty Kalra could face is to serve a life time behind bars. https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/westwood-man-agrees-plead-guilty-federal-narcotics-money-laundering-charges-running [Archive] Byline: Department of Justice U.S. Attorney’s Office Central District of California FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, August 23, 2019 Westwood Man Agrees to Plead Guilty to Federal Narcotics, Money Laundering Charges for Running Unlicensed Bitcoin Exchange and ATM
LOS ANGELES – A Westwood man has agreed to plead guilty to federal criminal charges for owning and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business where he exchanged up to $25 million in cash and virtual currency for individuals, including Darknet drug dealers and other criminals, some of whom used his Bitcoin ATM kiosk.
Kunal Kalra, 25 – who was also known as “Kumar,” “shecklemayne” and “coinman” – was charged today in a four-count criminal information filed in United States District Court and is expected to make his initial court appearance next month. Pursuant to a plea agreement also filed today, Kalra agreed to plead guilty to four felonies: distribution of methamphetamine, operating an unlicensed money transmitting business, laundering of monetary instruments, and failure to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program.
This is believed to be the first federal criminal case charging an unlicensed money remitting business that used a Bitcoin kiosk.
According to the court documents, from May 2015 through October 2017, Kalra knowingly operated a virtual currency exchange business where he exchanged U.S. dollars for Bitcoin and vice versa. Kalra charged commissions for exchanging dollars for Bitcoin, and he only dealt with high-volume customers willing to exchange at least $5,000 per transaction. Kalra admitted in his plea agreement that he exchanged Bitcoin for cash from criminals, including those who received Bitcoin from selling narcotics on the Darknet.
Kalra established bank accounts in the names of others, including fake businesses, which allowed him, for a time, to conceal his illicit business activities, court papers state. Kalra also admitted to operating a kiosk – essentially an ATM – where his customers could exchange Bitcoin for cash and vice versa. Kalra profited from every transaction conducted on the ATM. Customers who sought to do an exchange using this ATM were not required to provide their identities and Kalra did not install a camera or implement any features requiring customers to identify themselves, the plea agreement states.
Kalra also admitted that in 2017 he exchanged approximately $400,000 in cash for Bitcoin for an undercover agent who contacted him online and later met him in person on multiple occasions at a coffee shop in Los Angeles. The undercover agent told Kalra that his virtual currency were proceeds of drug trafficking, and Kalra continued with various transactions, according to the plea agreement.
In June 2017, Kalra sold nearly two pounds of methamphetamine to an undercover law enforcement official in exchange for $6,000. Kalra and the undercover agent later met at a coffee shop in Signal Hill to exchange $50,000 in Bitcoin for cash, which the undercover agent represented to Kalra was the proceeds of the sales of the methamphetamine that Kalra had sold to the agent, the plea agreement states.
Law enforcement seized nearly $889,000 in cash from Kalra’s bank accounts and vehicle, as well as approximately 54.3 Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
The maximum possible sentence Kalra could receive for these charges is life in federal prison.
Kalra also faces federal criminal charges in San Antonio, Texas, that were filed earlier this month. That case alleges Kalra conspired to commit money laundering for a drug trafficking network that sold fraudulent prescription tablets, including some laced with methamphetamine and fentanyl. In the plea agreement filed today, Kalra agreed to plead guilty to those charges in Los Angeles federal court.
This matter was investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, IRS Criminal Investigation, and the Los Angeles Police Department. The Federal Bureau of Investigation assisted with the investigation.
This case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Puneet V. Kakkar of the International Narcotics, Money Laundering, and Racketeering Section.
COINMAN1 u=911630 's known wallet address had over 7.6 BTC pass through it: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/14fsh84VQ8gWMETMrG8iyZ9Bbzi5zNFc6HIn both quotes the name "Coinman" is mentioned. While we have no way of knowing for certain that COINMAN1 u=911630 is actually Kunal Kalra the time frame's are consistent with coinman1's activities and going offline after the scam accusations commenced. It's possible that a Government official has been logging into the COINMAN1 u=911630 while Kunal Kalra has been in custody (hence my wondering if the account has been compromised)
In either case the COINMAN1 u=911630 account has unsettled scam accusations and I believe a flag is warranted. |
|
|
|
Lol, wrong link?  "NOPE!" *boom* tish! (trying to discuss Linux with anyone who uses it is like trying to talk to the water cooler expert knowledgable in every subject but in the end knows very little)RTFM! They say by way of answer... |
|
|
|
2. Each DT2-member must have been active and posting in the past 6 months (this gets rid of abandoned accounts on DT2)
Well i don't think this is a good idea since some of inactive DT 2 members like diamondcardz (inactive since 2015) and Zepher (RIP) (not just them) neg rated scammers and trolls months or years ago. if they removed from the DT network, their feedbacks on those scammers will be invalidated since they aren't in the trust network anymore. it will be a mess and a lot of work for other DT members to retagged all of the users who were tagged by DT users who were gone in this forum months or years ago. True, but if the users who voted them in one and all become inactive - what then? Make exceptions based on who gave the most Red Paint ™ |
|
|
|
Monthly update. The list of DT1 members has been changed. As I can see, new users have been added to the DT1 group. There are currently 94 users on the DT1 list, 6 of them are excluded by other DT1 members. All DT1 members trust 373 DT2 members. You seem to have the only DT3 list doing the 'rounds - do you have a full DT3 list at all? |
|
|
|
I'm late to this discussion, but I've been testing the Lightning Network on the recommendation of LoyceV who is trying to garner interest via his Little Lightning Loans thread elsewhere in BCT. I have Eclair on two mobile devices, and Zap on my PC all have three BTC 0.0011 channels open the first two are random while the third is via nodes in and around Amsterdam in the hope that these would enable transactions to and from Loyce's devices. (yes, before anyone asks, that's nine channels) the only TX I've been able to send or receive on either mobile device is if both are open and I get really, really lucky that channels are found between the two devices. Zap was able to send a "repayment" to Loyce but hasn't been able to send to either mobile device. Zap doesn't recognise payment requests from one mobile, but will accept payment requests from the other mobile... even though both devices installed the exact same copy of the apk file for Android Devices. I have also got running the testnet lightning node for Eclair on both mobile devices and it is also a struggle to find a path even though I've had some 20 channels established on each device. (Unlike the main net, my test net each have ~10 BTC each with channels at the maximum BTC 0.1677721 that the program will allow. I haven't been able to find a PC test-net lightning node program but could go up to BTC 100+ on a single lightning node if I there were a PC version. (Linux comments can be found here...) Neither mobile device seems to be able to maintain any connections once the screen saver comes on, so my testnet channels are a never ending series of closed by the other side distractions. Somewhere along the way I picked up an inbound channel on one mobile device, but TX's across that channel are also rather hit and miss. |
|
|
|
... That leads to Trust Selfscratchers: DT1-members who include (almost) every user who ever left them positive feedback on their Trust list. The #1 (not on DT1 this month) is Staff member Dabs, who's still included by theymos. Back on topic... Loyce, your self scratcher list you cite http://loyce.club/trust/selfscratchers/ is now 15 weeks out of date. Off topic again, have you noticed your merits and my post count have been neck-and-neck for weeks now? 
Apparently my 1 comment outweighs the continuous cancerous behaviour he has been displaying, resulting in merit rewards.
The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many Spock? I've just finished telling Yoshi that he needs to rise above it all now that he's on DT2. May I suggest you go back through my merit list - I think you'll be surprised who and for what I've given merits for in the past. |
|
|
|
I distrusted you for rewarding the cancerous behaviour of an obvious alt account (amongst other reasons). That is completely different from organizing voting random people into DT.
You *were* bigoted in your posts and you were called out by the UID you were attacking. But you attacked/punished *me* instead? Would you expect that kind of behaviour of others, or, just yourself? |
|
|
|
let's turn our attention back to the actual subject of these flags being namely the merit abuse. You can't create a Flag for Merit abuse. See Trust flags. @wolwoo: Let's not make this a pissing contest for Merit sources  I have 500+ more sMerit to hand out, I've given more than 5000 sMerit in more than 4000 transactions to more than 1000 people on more than 70 different boards. Chances are you'll find some you disagree with. Let me quote this: If a DT member tags you for something stupid involving merit (ie. probably anything less than selling merit), then they're not going to be a DT member for much longer.
Aside from that, if people complain about whether things deserve merit at all, then that's something to perhaps think about, but if you conclude that they're wrong, then that's that. You don't need to stress about it or defend yourself constantly. It's conceivable that someday you and I will end up disagreeing too much about this stuff and I'll remove your source status, but it's really not a big deal. The merits were obtained by deception by not being handed out to those who Vispilio said they would be distributed to. The untrustworthiness of the others is related to what happened when they received those merits, hence the merits are relevant. Flags have three choices: Are either supported, not acted upon or, opposed. I can't recall @theymos giving cart-Blanche to anyone to attack the creator of a flag. Wait what, Timelord creating Flags that are absolute bullshit? Surprising.
And a personal thanks to you Lutpin for Opposing the flag against me. 702 Insufficient support. Vispilio flagged Timelord2067 (type 1, see why). Supported by mhanbostanci, Kalemder, Vispilio, wolwoo, gospodin, ekiller, DragonDance. Opposed by Foxpup, suchmoon, LoyceV, mindrust, Lutpin, teeGUMES, DireWolfM14[/size]. As I've said on your trust wall you can show great courage when you want to.  |
|
|
|
|
wolwoo's crayon must be getting very blunt - he coloured in @Foxpup and @Hhampuz in the first list, but not the second (as well as skipping over LoyceV a few times and left people such as @Vod out entirely)
|
|
|
|
So what is the verdict on this new DT1 system? I looked through the current DT1 members and I am lost on how some of these guys are DT1. I am not complaining as I opted out of it and all, but am really curious if people feel things are better/worse/same etc...
You'll fit in quite nicely... 
I think it's a joke. I share Theymos' opinion that the old system needed an overhaul but we've seen plenty of merit cycling and vote manipulation to get people into DT. At this point I think it would be better to completely remove DT.
Says the guy who slapped me with retaliatory distrust after I gave a user merit when they called out TheNewAnon135246's racist posts... Ironic - really. @The Pharmacist @LoyceV @suchmoon @foxpup |
|
|
|
...
@ YOSHIE: Please keep it civil. There's no need to lower yourself to their gutter level. ( you're on DT2 now in case you hadn't heard). Rise up above their petty words and continue to offer proof to smack them down until they stay down. |
|
|
|
Now that the mock indignation and name calling has died down for a few hours, let's turn our attention back to the actual subject of these flags being namely the merit abuse. - https://bpip.org/smerit.aspx?from=Vispilio
On the 15th of February 2019 Vispilio sends merits to:
- 2/15/2018 3:10:00 PM Vispilio AlyattesLydia 10
- 2/15/2018 3:43:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 10
- 2/15/2018 5:52:00 PM Vispilio polatcelil 1
Then on the 18th of February 2019 Vispilio sends merits to:
- 2/18/2018 10:11:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 6
- 2/18/2018 10:12:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 4
- https://bpip.org/smerit.aspx?to=Vispilio
On the 15th of February 2019 Vispilio receives merits from:
- 2/15/2018 2:59:00 PM tayfundeniz Vispilio 10
- 2/15/2018 3:38:00 PM tayfundeniz Vispilio 10
- 2/15/2018 5:09:00 PM polatcelil Vispilio 1
Then on the 18th of February 2019 Vispilio receives merits from:
- 2/18/2018 10:16:00 PM AlyattesLydia Vispilio 10
To put it into perspective, look at the transactions in sequence: Firstly Vispilio receives then sends ten merits (twice) in under an hour. - 2/15/2018 2:59:00 PM tayfundeniz Vispilio 10
- 2/15/2018 3:10:00 PM Vispilio AlyattesLydia 10
- 2/15/2018 3:43:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 10
- 2/15/2018 3:38:00 PM tayfundeniz Vispilio 10
90 minutes later Vispilio receives then gives back a merit to polatcelil - 2/15/2018 5:09:00 PM polatcelil Vispilio 1
- 2/15/2018 5:52:00 PM Vispilio polatcelil 1
Three days later, Vispilio gives out ten merits to PHI1618 then four minutes later receives ten merits back. - 2/18/2018 10:11:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 6
- 2/18/2018 10:12:00 PM Vispilio PHI1618 4
- 2/18/2018 10:16:00 PM AlyattesLydia Vispilio 10
Continuing the theme of grand names, AlyattesLydia is none other than: [Source Britannica] Alyattes - king of Lydia
Alyattes, (died c. 560 bc), king of Lydia, in west-central Anatolia (reigned c. 610–c. 560 bc), whose conquest created the powerful but short-lived Lydian empire. while tayfundeniz is Turkish for typhoon sea [Google Translate] (laudă is Romanian for Praise by the way [Google Translate])
tayfundeniz's entire merit history is receive X merits, then given X merits back/forward: http://loyce.club/Merit/history/982157.html ( 1,1,10,10,10,5,1,1,2,1,1,1 Vs
1,1,10,10,10,5,1,2,1,2,1,1,1 ) Similarly polatcelil's merit boomerang has mostly similar dates referencing the from polatcelil sent to others (they all come back to him/her): http://loyce.club/Merit/history/954490.htmlIt's likely that the merits given to polatcelil then given to others are grouped as follows: 1->1 given to polatcelil then sent from polatcelil 2<-(uncertain which of 2-5) sent by polatcelil after receiving from other 3->6 given to polatcelil then sent from polatcelil (4-6) -> 13 sent by polatcelil as five after receiving from other 2,1,2 |
|
|
|
|
Thanks to @Hey there Delilah for reminding people that there are alts amongst us in this thread.
The fact that a flag can be started against myself as retaliation offering no proof shows how desperate this merit abuse group is.
|
|
|
|
DT2 members only need to be included by just one DT1 member.
Unless of course they have multiple DT1 distrusts then they are nothing... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
