I created a vinatiy address to be staked with my account, even used it many times on the forum but just forgot to stake it on the Stake Your Bitcoin Address thread. Thanks for the reminder @DdmrDdmr. -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Today is December 30, 2019. Wishing Bitcointalk Community a Prosperous and Full of Bitcoin (not alts) New Year 2020 !
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1JAYESHqohMYvXS4Do6ZNEYJiwZ588MVKi
G0BCCSZGvZQnmCE4c6n8Nx8zvZVFT1+butsfPbFF7ka1QvCEfIxO5jsigJI014lZVpVMHkq0+t3EBrvVtf8Xydo=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
|
|
|
What is it you think you are actually doing besides defending a con artist? You're basically just trolling. You don't actually contribute jack to shit and have officially become just another cryptohunter... Lost their mind after receiving a negative trust for being an incessant asshole.
That negative trust is not warrant to anyone with his right mind, looks nice of you laughing at users about the abuse they have faced and not even reacting to it only because you have personal grudges. |
|
|
|
I don't like to think of the world or human nature like that, but maybe it is just me?
I do accept that we need all kinds of perspectives, too, so I can appreciate someone who is more skeptical than me regarding the various negative aspects of human nature, too.
I have gotten to the point of ignoring it, only came to this thread because my name was mentioned and I got an alert.
Hey, you childish guys, better than wanking and rambling about it with walls of text, do some action. You are too an part of community ! Yes, you don't like involving in the drama and shit but you can still do the right thing by excluding the user in question from your trust list and that is the most simple and right step to do. Many here already know this is harsh and unacceptable use of trust system, better than repeating it again and again some political ditrusting actions would be a wise decision to all. |
|
|
|
As per I see, broke_tradah is trying to sell his bot from a year now, but he has not put forward any solid proof of his winning. Even with the help of his bot he is violating the casino terms which can lead to the ban of the account using his script. His script even seem to be sending all the data about the saved usernames and password to https://freebitcobot.dynu.net/safe.php according to the script, which he uses for his own referral profits from the site. Below statement from TheQuin (moderator or support person on Freebitco.in), makes it more obvious that the bot doesn't work as it is stated by broke_tradah and he never actually won large amounts. I do monitor accounts that win but I never have spotted the OP's account that runs the live stream.
By looking at all this, I think the bot is pretty much risky for any new user and even to there privacy, hence supporting the flag.
I don't see the link to the flag in the OP, so putting it up here. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1121 |
|
|
|
After committing shady activities its quite unfair to expect forgiveness where i don't think that was a proper example of solution. After revealing their cheap activities and having considerable pressure from bitcointalk community they made their decision. In my opinion keeping trust on their new platform will not gonna be an wise step.
Personally i believe everyone have their own way of thinking and most probably who submitted their negative trust on duckdice they did that for valid reason.
What they did was not that shady that one just can't forgive and nor it was an intended incident. They already put an note on the withdrawal page that if you cancel the bonus balance the whole amount in the wallet would be cancelled but OP miss-read it. I know this is stupid thing from a casino but it was not intended and later solved and even the scheam was cancelled by them. I personally would mark this inside a forgivable line as a casino user atleast. |
|
|
|
P.S. Your second identity is already compromised, but keep writing so we can keep feeding the machine more data. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Come on, this thread is about if community thinks this type of ratings should be that non-explanatory or not. Keep your personal attacks out, yours is just an example from many as I said in the OP. |
|
|
|
It's trivial for theymos to ban you on all levels assuming he wants to play the role of a central authority. This behaviour isn't banned on any level of DT.
Your behaviour is already banned on DT1 level, but still that doesn't change the feedback to be appearing under default trust and that half banning action doesn't serves it's purpose. |
|
|
|
|
This topic is not about if my red trust is justified or not, it is surely a stupid rating in any sense to any decent minded user here, but it is more about if such usage of trust should be banned by administration not only in DT1 but even in DT2. I don't know if it is programming difficulty or something for theymos to ban from both DT1 and DT2, but it is pretty important now as the damaged caused due to this is largely influential to major community using default trust lists.
Hence, I put this topic in meta, instade of reputation as it's more about an overall forum issue and not targeted to the Lauda's trust rating on me, I don't find anything more this forum is powered by than the community here and your opinions matters.
|
|
|
|
Today I got a navigate trust rating for sending merits to a post I found informative...yes read again sending merits, and it was by someone who has lots of inclusions from well-known members here. Lauda 2019-12-29 Reference Maliciously merits what he/she knows to be a lie in order to propagate it and cause harm to me. Wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them, now should anyone trust a word they say. Mine is not the only example, many users are just buried under this type of trust abuse. I would like to get the community opinions on " if such type of usage of red trust should be acceptable and is it being that non-explanatory for the sender useful for the community overall". |
|
|
|
"Towerbet" project seems to be totally connect to "Duckdice". They have personally accepted it here. Hey! My name is Stan, I am one of the admins on DuckDice. Today I'm proud to announce our new project - Tower.bet. But if you see the issue they are tag for by multiple DTs, it is already resolved and they paid back the 2 BTC. 2. we've refunded the initial deposit to Ozafejyw782 (it's already on a balance). There were people mentioning that we should revert the balance to the moment before cancellation – and this would be the easiest and acceptable solution for everyone, however (unfortunately) this is not technically possible, we just don't have this possibility.
So we believe now this issue has been resolved.
I think the above is the the most right way to react in such situations, they even cancelled there bonus system due to this issue. They could be back again with an hope of forgiveness and I think they deserve one.
Tagged by the way since I believe everyone should know about their shady behaviour.
Did you even bothered to check accusation situation before tagging ? |
|
|
|
|
I agree, there are a chain of incidences here and a person who's mouth is vomiting shit would always do shit.
He should have just accepted he is not an good trader, on the top of that asking other for funds to trade even after knowing he can't reach the promised profits is shady AF !
I am supporting this flag after lots of patience !
|
|
|
|
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.
You forget that it was said in the context of the discussion of the meritsors  That doesn't mean that normal users who are not merit source could be tagged for something stupid involving merit. Don't waste others time because you don't like someone, buy creating unwanted accusations and drama around. I am out. |
|
|
|
Theymos doesn't encourage DTs to tag for merit abuse.
However, a huge number of users on the forum put a red tag for it. I can give you a million examples of such tags from DT1 You should trust none of them, all of those millions are wrong, all of them should be out of DT. 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.
|
|
|
|
Before making such conclusions, you should have read the whole topic.
I already did hence making conclusions. As I said better handled by campaign manager by kicking out the participant. 2.) This farm has been involved in merit abuse (admitted independently).
Theymos doesn't encourage DTs to tag for merit abuse. 3.) be.open was engaged in account trading/changing/gifting check reference from suchmoon: Lied about the account being hacked, then "gifted" to a friend. If you deal with this user you may find out it was hacked or gifted again if something goes pear-shaped. He was not engaged in account trading/changing/gifting, he just lied about it, that could be displayed via a neutral for sure. |
|
|
|
It's not an abuse to give mass negative if it's a proven scammer, sometimes it's better to do so as the DT network is very dynamic now and the feedbacks can jump between trusted and untrusted after monthly DT1 updates by theymos.
I see and in case of scammers I totally agree. But beopen is not a scammer, he is respected member. It looks for me more that he is pursued by group of members, which were judging him earlier and still can not forget him, even if he was already painted and almost disapeared from the forum. I totally agree, using alt accounts is not prohibited here nor lying about having an alt and this even doesn't deserves a negative tag. The accusation made in the OP is even baseless as the campaign they were participating in did not have any such rules, and even if it had it was better handled by the manager of the campaign by kicking the participant out and not by some DT tags.
In our locale some users think that duplicating a review is some kind of wrong action. I mean, if you put someone on -1, that's enough.  I think they are more concerned about your reason for the tags, as all of them are BS. As LoyceV said, adding alts to trust list is not an trust abuse. |
|
|
|
I don't think anyone here geniuly feels TECSHARE is a scammer or he would scam anyone with funds.
What do you know about what other people think? I wouldn't trust mr. TECSHARE with a toenail, thus genuinely believe he can't be trusted. So fuck off and wank your little tool elsewhere. I don't know, I think this due to his 50+ positive feedbacks (on default trust) about successful trades. There are prettier beings that you can suck off other than OP.
Does it really look like that? I thought I was giving him some respect..  |
|
|
|
He's been lying all the time and he can't be trusted.
So you can just ~ him. suchmoon has already given him negative feedback for this. Is leaving mass negative feedbacks for the same thing not an abuse? It's not an abuse to give mass negative if it's a proven scammer, sometimes it's better to do so as the DT network is very dynamic now and the feedbacks can jump between trusted and untrusted after monthly DT1 updates by theymos. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Are any of these positions at all controversial or really under dispute? No. Good for you you can join bandwagons. Just do me a favor and stop pretending like everything is peachy when you are picking flowers while others are plowing the fields. @micgoossens, I know you feel pretty cosy around here and even in the Wall Observer thread, but the overall trust abuse on the forum is pretty much dustructive to many users. You would not tag someone if you feel he would not scam anyone right ?..I don't think anyone here geniuly feels TECSHARE is a scammer or he would scam anyone with funds. Better than rounding it to general and going keyboard ninja, read the thread and understand the situation, hope your reaction would not be the same. |
|
|
|
@Blacknavy has not reached his required activity level for legendary, the minimum limit is 755 and maximum 1000 activiy and he can level up anytime between this and yes this is set by the system itself randomly when you create the account. Rank | Description | Tag | | Legendary: | Activity: the Legendary membergroup has no universal activity requirement.
You are guaranteed to become Legendary somewhere between 775 and 1030 activity,
but the exact point in this range at which you become Legendary is random per user.
Gets 5 gold coins under his name of which the last is half dark blue.
| |
@hugeblack congratulations, hope your legendary rank comes before you reach 1000 activity ! Edit : COOL ! I see your rank has just turned to legendary..  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
