Bitcoin Forum
June 04, 2024, 11:27:15 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 »
61  Other / Meta / Re: Suggestion: Reduce 50 merit limit per post. on: January 08, 2020, 05:31:35 PM
I still find merits very hard to earn. Many times I make good posts, which I spend lots of minutes writing/formatting etc and receive 0, or 3, etc.

However, there are sometimes merit sources or even not-sources giving 50 merit in a single post.

I believe there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of posts here which deserve not only 50 merits, but 100, 200. However, if a post is that good, it will be merited by multiple users and not 50 by a single one.

A post which few people gave 1 - 2 merits and one guy gave 50 is very unbalanced. No post deserve all that in a single transaction. This is a flaw in the merit system imo. If you take a look carefully, you will find that most of those 50 merit transactions are for bad posts, not good ones. No need to cite them here, everyone has already saw this happens many times before.

I am a merit source, but I don't find so difficult to spend my smerits. I prefer to give 3-4 per good (or above average) post than to give 50 in a single transaction. And I certainly prefer to see 50 smerits go poof than to give an overmerited stats to someone.

ALL of these improvements may help but not cure,  sure reduce from 50  to 3 MAX and run a bot to make the adjustments back to day one of the merit cancer intro. 1-2% of your given merits to 1 other member in a 365 day period after it is given obviously. If you can not find any other good posts from a board of millions then tough shit.

I think 3 max is more sensible.

However, after talking to some devs about this particular issue (who actually understand these types of challenges) there is NO POSSIBLE way to make merit = good post. Or rather there is NO WAY to even make the motivation for giving merit = what you think is a valuable post. Without fully removing ALL POSSIBLE implications of merit economically. 2 highly regarded developers told me the same thing. IMPOSSIBLE make that sink in.

While there is ANY other economic or any other benefit to merit other than to raise a merit score, then it will be gamed and distorted in a dangerous way that makes it net negative. No rank, no sig, no trust, no other implication other than a score that "should" give indication of prior number of great and valuable posts.

It is possible to tighten it up and remove subjectivity improving it a huge % but no making it 100% solid even from an intentional perspective. I mean peoples own evaluation will never be consistent even day to day 100% THEMSELVES. However their intent should be for good post or valuable post with NO OTHER considerations

Merit should have zero implications here, the more VALUE and benefits you allocate merit the MORE dangerous and gamed it will become. That is their own words, already this was what we suspected anyway.

Reducing from 50  to 3 max and put a % max to other member in x time, some criteria, some immediate punishment etc will all help a lot but will never fix it or even push it net positive in the full context is the opinion of those that understand these problems. Everyone else here just shouts what they think will benefit THEM the most. lol

There should be RULES for using merit scores for ANY decisions or benefits here with regards, sigs, trust etc. That is the only way to ensure people have no OTHER consideration for giving merit for a post they are evaluating.

Feel free to debunk these points.

But of course 1-50 leaves EVEN MORE room for HUGE gaming and abuse of this system and this entire board. Reduce to max 3 I would suggest 1 is even better. But MUST be retroactively adjusted else makes it even worse for those starting out now.

This post is the most valuable on this thread but will receive ZERO merit. That is a good thing because the smart reader will notice merit is gamed, political and economic weaponry that is dangerous and must be deleted or DRASTICALLY overhauled.

LFC bitchcon actually said something of value, more merit on that post please. Max 3 at a go though. Lauda must be sleeping off those last batch of vitamins hope he does not notice that or he is going to be guzzling gallons later today nom nom nom hahaha. LOL

Read, understand, accept.






62  Other / Meta / Re: Does this tread really deserve the attention it has got? on: January 08, 2020, 05:14:10 PM
If you look in investigations, you might be able to follow a link to find someone else with an apparent gambling problem who is somewhat close to TMAN.

Wow Calm down here Sherlock, I'm not connected to anyone here, admittedly I may of fucked up being a lazy cunt with the merits but fork you sir if you think I have any connection to any other account here - I dont have time for forking alts dude. Surely you know that by now

Hmmm can we believe someone that deliberately tries to deceive people that he wants to buy things from HIMSELF (got his pal to auction them) in an auction because he would get such a great DEAL but shame he has too many already??  deception for clear financial gain = scamming.

Or someone involved with LAUDA in extorting people then claiming it was all under cover agents?? yeeeeeeeeeeehhhh right
Or supporting nutildah who admits he will facilitate scamming others for 0.3 btc then try to delete the evidence??

Sometimes enough is enough of this kind of scamming and gaming of this forum.

The post in question is net negative garbage for the aforementioned reasons that nobody can dispute it should not have 1 single merit, I don't buy this WE DONT HAVE TIME to give merit out to deserving posts LOL well why be a merit source then?? so we want to be a merit source but simply do not have the time to bother with it really....bullshit.

This alt will be in the CIRCLE of those that would have been used to keep them on DT whilst they push their double standards on everyone else with impunity.

Good to notice nobody can debunk any of the points we raised earlier ESPECIALLY tmans THREAT to use merit as a punishment tool now by stating he will with hold it from the member bringing this IMPORTANT incidence to light. Punishment for speaking the truth is total proof the  merits system is crushing free speech. Like anyone was not really aware LOL, thats without it being used to leverage the STICK of trust (abuse) also.

63  Other / Meta / Re: Does this tread really deserve the attention it has got? on: January 08, 2020, 04:37:22 AM
I was seeing the threads in Beginner session and saw that below thread has 50 merits at a shot.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5214039.msg53491680#msg53491680

My question is, what message is this thread conveying that is useful to the community? Merits in my understanding are to encourage the account which is giving useful information to the users here. The thread does not even contain the struggle he did to upgrade his account, so that some newbie can be inspired.

Is getting merits that easy? Posting I become a Jr member on my birthday and get 50 merits, just like that? No struggle, no information nothing. I may be wrong here but my opinion is that in this case merit system is misused. I would request your attention and opinion on this.

That is not worth 1 merit. It is net negative garbage.

Just another example of these people demonstrating the merit system is a complete and utter dangerous cancer for this forum and kills free speech.

Here look PERFECT example of merits crushing free speech .... don't dare mention flagrant merit abuse, or just morons giving merit for crap OR YOU WILL NEVER GET ANY MERITS AND BE MARKED OUT for other punishments if you continue. Merit is a total cancer, that is the poorest design and implementation possible. FUCK noobie jail was brilliant compared to this free speech crushing, self certification for trust and chipmixer LOL

how about fuck off and worry about yourself and not others?

I gave the user 50 as I saw they are a decent poster, being a sauce is hard work sometimes as when I am not online much I can see the merits stacking up. I dont always have time in a month to hand out 400+ merits in small transactions so I try to help out the most deserving posters I see.


anyway - your on ignore for being a used tampon..

Peace out fucko - no merits for you from me!

Here is is his best pal lauda up to the same thing 50 merits EACH for garbage

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2829282

That post is not worthy of 1 merit. It is self congratulatory GARBAGE from a shit poster alt of tmans most likely or one they are POWERING up for their trust entrenching minions to game the trust system for good.

These threads are just MMMMMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE undeniable evidence the merit system is cancer here for free speech and creating a 2 tier system.

Get rid of this bogus dangerous and moronic crap.

I would not give that post 1 merit. It is net negative trash. It is posing as support for the broken system that it is scamming and gaming, like most of DT and merit sources here. LOL

How much longer is this merit crap going to be allowed to ruin the free speech on this forum. MERIT = carrot TRUST = stick.  You control merit you control them both. = game over. Worst thing ever happened to this forum period. That includes lauda and tman and nutildah and their scam supporting pals joining.

Got to LOVE the excuses for tman here

1. it is a good thing because now you have been busted ....errr well its good because you have brought your own gaming of this system to notice LOL
sadly the intial poster is now off tmans merit xmas list hahahah
2. err tman was drunk
3. tman does NOT HAVE TIME to give merit to merit worthy posts so just dumps it on his alts or shit posts  - WHY IS HE A FUCKING MERIT SOURCE THEN since he is also a fucking retard that does not have the capacity to evaluate a 50 merit post or even a 1 merit worthy post.
4. robovac will start a new thread tmans best merit joke allocations, great entertainment for the forum ... ISTMANSTILLGIVING50MERITSTOSHITPOSTS.TK  or whatever they weird domains that dumb skank keeps spinning up.


Debunk any of the on topic and relevant central points if you can merit laden morons.

TMAN? this is the same auction scammer that pretended not to be selling his OWN items so he could scream about how much he wanted to buy them himself if the did not already have so many?? this is probably just one of his or lauda's or any of those scumbags alts that would be adding them all to his trust inclusions pretty soon. IF that had not already happened.
 
64  Economy / Reputation / Re: More abuse by TECSHARE NSFW reee(sponse) on: January 06, 2020, 03:56:03 PM
You sure are visibly spiteful today. So far you can read my mind, building trust over 8 years of trading is "trust farming" because you declare it so. I asked before but you never quoted, what retaliatory ratings? The one left for the hacked Koshgel account that flipped out because he didn't like what I had to say in the Politics section and decided that was a good use of the trust system? I remember the original Koshgel, that isn't him.

8 years LOL

You didn't even know that you need 10 users to include you until I told you.

But please do go ahead and explain how adding Quickseller to your trust list is totally normal in TECSHARE's alternative universe.

You know what that reminds me of? That time you pulled that live flamingo out of your ass. You know how I know it happened? I can imagine it therefore it happened.

(should I tell him? OK, I'm just going to tell him)

PrimeNumber7 is an alt of Quickseller. You have Quickseller distrusted and PN7 trusted. Which is funny. It was an inside joke, until now. You never traded with PN7, he only has left 3 ratings which were all neutral, he didn't add you to his trust list -- is the reason why you may have decided to include him this one?

anyone the resident clowns exclude I immediately find interest in.

Because PN7 had long been excluded by suchmoon and foxpup when you decided to include him, and lo and behold, the same week you added PN7 you also added by rallier, who is also excluded by suchmoon and foxpup.

I wonder which other questionable members, scammers, or their alts you have added to your trust list in an attempt to spite the resident clowns...

Oh, well we can start with:

- hacker1001101001 (he may well be a decent guy with a shady past, but had a blank trust list up until last week; pretty weird for you to include him for reasons other than spite)

- 3meek (distrusted by the Russian section moderator and several senior Russian members, but what do they know)

Long story short: you've been using the trust system to satisfy your personal grudges and ended up including Quickseller as a result of it. Further proof you belong nowhere near DT.

where is the PROOF PN7 = QS??

where is the PROOF QS is any more dangerous  than Nutildah?? who has admitted that they will willingly scam facilitate other members for 0.3btc AND THEN DELETE THE EVIDENCE if they can, or lauda or tman ??

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.0

I would like to see a comparison between QS if pn7 is even QS, lauda, tman and nutildah and have a big debate on who is clearly more dangerous and desperate to scam.

I note that moronbozo is STILL quoting this version of TROLL that the forum has CLEARLY demonstrated  is NOT their version of trolling since that would be IMPOSSIBLE to police. They prefer to use the definition of trolling as those that consistently present as true information that is conclusively debunked nonsense.

QS to me looks MORE trustworthy than nutildah, lauda tman and most of their double standards scammer supporting pals. How can they be here lecturing on this ??

Moronbozo's initial post is such a mess, the central point other than he has been fisted too much by lauda and can't stop spraying his shit everywhere is a waste of time since we mostly already knew that too much anal fisting creates these kind of symptoms by watching it happen in real time to other members here.

Moronbozo finds it very difficult to form structured thoughts that others can follow so we should not be too upset by this. I think he is best to continue his research into the theory of people "spamming words" here on the  forum. I think he is on to something there.

Moronbozo clearly trust abused TS because he is either lauda from laudas moronic gene pool of scamming scum who is previously given red trust for completely stupid reasons. I think he knows he can not control his retarded urges hence why he probably requested to be removed from DT.

Moronbozos claims in the initial post... as usual look moronic.
65  Economy / Reputation / Re: mosprognoz - Needs To Learn on: January 06, 2020, 03:37:15 PM
WOW another DEEPONION PAIDSHILL ANN SCAM PROMOTER.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2057229.0

https://www.google.com/search?q=revealing+deeponion+scam+site:bitcointalk.org&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwihyoWJkO_mAhXcwsQBHQ1eBb4QrQIoBDAAegQIBxAN&biw=1280&bih

=609

Let me introduce you to The-One-Above-All mentally sick person with a clear signs of schizophrenia.Believes in ghosts and devils. Thinks that everyone here on this forum are his enemies. Posts some BS and nonsense. Needs to visit his doctor a.s.a.p. but refuses doing so.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2580400

LOOKs like more lies and nonsense from someone willing to work with SCAMS they have tried to call out in the past so they can BOTH MAKE LOTS OF MONEY.

tag this peronson if you are on DT it is your responsibility. I have no idea why Suchmoon is not tagging them after presenting a very strong case this person is incredibly dangerous, not to mention this VERY issue here that he is encouraging scam accounts to make other new accounts so his pal lauda can work with them AGAIN..

How is this person not getting a red tag? makes a joke of this forum that other DT are too spinless to act because they see he is likely another lauda alt.
66  Other / Meta / Re: 50 merit for an non-contribute topic on: January 06, 2020, 03:33:38 PM
1. there is no such thing as merit abuse (except apparently if you honestly admit you will give special consideration to good merit worthy posts that favor your own politics, rather than just do it without saying so or deny it when really you are, or selling them blatantly)

2. lauda and his pal swapped 50 merits for simply pushing some crap service or project nobody got him banned, or reversed the merits. Go take a look. No double standards. ALSO are they not his own merits to do with as he pleases?? some merit sources give 50 merits to people because..... they ask for them lol

3. merit is subjective, NOBODY can apparently claim for sure the "giver" did not find the post worthy of 50 merits personally. FACT

4. Merit is completely moronic, subjective, gamed and dangerous nonsense. Not worthy worrying about the allocation now just keep throwing it anywhere you like for now. Just focus on getting it reset and some criteria put in place for its allocation going forward. Then put some sensible limits like 0 or 1 merit,  0-50 is of course completely mad and would require such an expansive, stringent set of criteria it would be impossible for most here to evaluate a 50 merit post.

5. Yes, that post looks worthy of zero merit REALLY (if we had some sensible criteria not just give it to posts you think are good). Like most of the DT and merit sources posts that do receive merit from other DT and merit sources it is undeserving . Actually  DT and MS are mostly of negative value for misrepresenting and deceiving other fools that there was some value in their nonsense and lies. So if their net negative posts are worthy of 5-10 merits, this post is worthy 1000's of merits for simply  having no value. Therefore to be fair boost this post up to a couple of K minimum with DT includes for both lol
67  Economy / Reputation / Re: OGnasty removing the scam tags from a scammer? if they remove his tags ?? on: January 04, 2020, 01:49:43 PM

Lauda removed my rating, and I then gave Lauda an ultimatum if my forgiveness is to be earned.  Lauda chose to make a promise and I will hold Lauda to that promise.  I believe this was the best way to eliminate questionable actions moving forward.  If I am proven wrong, changes will be made.  I think after so many years, a new approach might be beneficial to everyone.

OGnasty removed his rating towards Lauda so he wouldn't be restricted from future DT1 membership - it has nothing to do with peace or control of Lauda.  It was out of his control.
 Wink
Are you saying theymos was threatening to blacklist OgN from DT1 if he didn’t remove his negative rating?


A direct answer from OGnasty would be useful.

Yes, it would.  Let's see  OG post "I was never threatened with DT blacklist if I didn't withdraw my negative trust from Lauda."


YOU WERE PROVEN WRONG REGARDING THIS BY THEYMOS OWN WORDS concerning his own actions. (of which he can get correct i hope) 

How about you apologize for getting that completely wrong.

I on the other hand make apologies to absolutely nobody for stating anyone not red tagging lauda or removing red tags from lauda should be bitch slapped around for either being a wussy or a complicit scammer supporting piece of shit.

Also vod is a complete liar and trust abuser. He said we deleted his words to silence and misrepresent him. The fucking idiot had made the SAME claims we deleted 2x already and we said he must present evidence to continue to make those claims. He says red trust is therefore required.

That behavior ALONG with his admission he is too scared of lauda and his gang to act as he believes he should act reduces his credibility to zero. Then doxing the boards treasurer....

Need we go on. VOD is done and dusted here. He is probably not a scammer but just a pathetic weak ass dreg that made some bad pals who took him off the rails.

The criticism of OG here stands that he should not have removed laudas red trust knowing full well lauda is a dangerous scumbag to this forum. However, these other allegations vod keeps launching against OG seem to be dubious and motivated by other personal matters.

This removal of laudas red is the ONLY thing we can see that OG has clearly done wrong here. We will not let this thread be a jumping ground to bring other doubtful accusations against him.

68  Other / Meta / Re: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? on: January 04, 2020, 01:28:07 PM
Why ask lauda a question in public ?
See if I can drag some honesty of the situation out of them..

If we were on DT they would all be glowing red
Why don't you go leave you own little notes with supporting references on all those you consider deserving?  
None of that copy/paste shit either.. Detail specifically and thoroughly for each one with good references..

dragging honesty from a scammer/extortionist/shady escrow and flagrant trust abuser is a tricky task, tread with caution.

the dirty turds thread has it all documented, NOBODY has refuted even 1 of the observable instances there. I mean if red tags for for things that don't even make a lemons flag there is enough there to light them all up...actually a lot of that is full on scamming and scammer supporting if people take the time to investigate it all.

Of course like vod and LFC bitcoin have publicaly confessed when they cried out in admission they have to do what the inner core of scammers say because if not they will be picked out for punishment. That is ANOTHER problem with the systems of control they don't just allow collusion they DEMAND AND ENFORCE collusion and work to prevent DT doing the right thing even if they WANT TO. The economic punishment is too great. (that does not apply to you eddie since you seem to have been singled out and punished already)

Of course as someone said to me in private just today, I am totally overlooking that too early of a willingness to hammer down red correctly on deserving DT will likely result in your expulsion from DT and therefore render this approach lacking.... so that is yet another design flaw. You can not even do the right thing until you are full entrenched (years of supporting scammers and scammer supporters) by that time you are so hated by honestly abused members it makes it even harder to leave the only group that do not already hate you and have been hating on you for some time..haha

The only option to stop trust abuser or render the abuse mute is a reset as is being suggested by some members and a redesign on objective verifiable metrics, this will mean culling a lot of campaign managers that are in league with these dirty dogs or shaming them out from projects by pressuring those projects into hiring managers that will use transparent objective rules for their selection/denial process. Of course our own clever and as yet not debunked improvements would be better still, but of course they garnered little interest or support in meta ...lol surprise surprise.

Its all economic considerations here eddie. Don't ever think more than 0.1% here give one fuck about contributing to the adoption and progress of an end to end decentralized trustless arena. They want bitcoins to return to fiat to lambos , coke and hookers. That is the end of their ambitions. Not to state those lofty goals are not commendable and enjoyable, but there is no wider scope for many. There is no do the right thing. There is only do the right thing for me to have lambos coke and hookers. They do not realize those are not mutually exclusive.

Trust abuse is required to retain the status quo. Can't have people suggesting changes to the status quo, or defending those that suggest such changes, or that the prime beneficiaries are scammers and scammer supporters can we. Those must be silenced with trust abuse or  a ban. Until the status quo is broken there will be a lot more trust abuse and a lot more fighting and bitterness here. Thank merit for that primarily it is undeniable that before that most of the very most dangerous scammers were removed from dt and glowing red as they fucking should be now. Scammers will always find a way to game things that can be gamed for their own self interest ... merit and dt are like a honey pot for that generally speaking. The most sneaky are those that are supporting scammers and trust abusers whilst APPEARING to be neutral or on the fence or too dumb to see the scamming and abuse. Those are likely MORE dangerous to the board in the full context than perhaps even the flagrant ones ....food for thought.

Anyway eddie we leave it here. They were suggestions only. Perhaps there are problems with those after discussing with others, who's opinions we do value. More people on dt like eddie would be sensible. Even if they do not agree with us then at least they have no financially motivated wrong doing in their past, no sig spamming, no trust abuse, not afraid to speak up against even those lfc bitcoin and vod are terrified to disobey LOL  where are more people like this?? I am going to have a look at the trust list thing and at least add and exclude before we leave this board for a long period. The odd contribution just so there is no fretting we are gone for good may be possible though. I worry for you all in my absence but it is unavoidable.

The sad thing is there is no longer trust abuse (what requirement is there less than a lemons flag ffs lol) , like there is no merit abuse, the carrot and stick have the same economic power but no accountability or responsibility. How fun.



69  Economy / Reputation / Re: More trust system abuse by Lauda on: January 04, 2020, 12:40:53 PM
to me, it is like a kind of unsolicited advice.

you are trying to put some kind of burden on me to study  ... ...  a sufficient amount of research about basics or whatever.

OK I'll stop..


Hahahaahahha

No wonder you receive red trust.  ahahahahahha  

Do really believe that you are representing the ideas of my post fairly?    Of course, I have a tendency to ramble a bit with explanations and even stream of consciousness, sometimes, but your summary is truly quite a bit less than genuine, amiNOTrite?

Ultimately, you can do whatever you want in terms of your posting behavior(s) or pestering anyone (including me) on any given topic, because I don't easily get flustered, even when members seem to be attempting to purposefully misrepresent the gist of my earlier points... like you seem to have just done.  Go figure?

JJG the low functioning dreg waffling turd, keeps on supporting clear trust abuse. Not just in this case with lauda but in other instances also. How has this scumbag avoided red tags so far?? man up DT good guys.

Those supporting clear trust abuse are clearly untrustworthy. DT members should tag them red. This is what the system is for.

Lauda abuses trust usually to

a/ punish those that present observable instances of his prior scamming and shady deeds
b/ Punish those that present observable instances of his pals that entrench him with support prior scamming and shady deeds
c/ those that speak up to defend those he is abusing.

yogg, jjg, mosprognoz, owlcatz, tman, mornobozo, thenew anon, ultraelite, xtraelv tourettes poet, all of these are every bit as bad as lauda for trust abuse because they enable and support his trust abuse. ALL should be red tagged to warn others they condone his scamming and extorting and shady escrowing and trust abuse (to conceal those instances) if that is not untrustworthy then what is??

note them all down and work towards making sure these are all cut away from positions of trust.

laudas trust abuse is too blatant now, they know that accounts days are numbered don't focus to much only on lauda.

Also start pushing behind this reset idea i see some members supporting, this would be an excellent first step to prevent this kind of trust abuse lauda enjoys being able to dole out.

70  Economy / Reputation / Re: What if Theymos would Reset Reputation now? on: January 04, 2020, 12:11:57 PM
some twat trying to sound smart whilst revealing he is a fucking moron.

1. the ONLY objective indication of BAD people or bad rep is type 2 and type 3 flags.

these should NOT be reset.

2. feedback should be wiped or the scores removed. People can read and do their own homework to investigate the subjective garbage written there and make their own decisions.

3. Merit should be WIPED.

4. All legends and heros should be merit sources. When abuse (some set of small criteria can be introduced) is detected they can be removed along with their rank.

This is one possible way to fix this mess.

Long blathering posts that based their BELIEFS on obviously bogus bullshit like good feedback score = trustworthy member  bad feedback score = untrustworthy member
lots of merit = valuable poster  no merit = low value to zero value poster  demonstrates clearly for all their flowery waffle and nerd spew they are  morons.

Noobius... some self educated peasant who's malnourished brain now means he has no empathy for those that shared his humble peasant origins. Poor waffling retarded wretch, just keep telling him how smart he sounds for grouping together lots of words and creating analogies that are pretty much useless.

YES reset everything that is based upon subjective and openly gamed crap. Then put in some sensible criteria and give those that have something to lose and punish merit source.

Is this really the old nullius?? dubious.

LOL dubious noobius hahah keep blathering on peasant nerd fool. You sound to us, like you have tried to emulate anonymint a little bit in posting style. Sadly he is far superior to anything you can shart out. But yep they got him banned too. I mean you might as well ban 99.99% of the board and keep AM then the board still has more value and less resource drain. Obviously delete the dubious nullius account now that it has multi sharting out net negative moronic spew under the guise of flowery nerd waffle.

Let's reset anything that could have been gamed and manipulated far too easily that will cure a lot of the boards fucking mess. Then let's introduce sensible rules like if you have engaged in direct financially motivated wrong doing you are fucking blacklisted from positions of TRUST.

Your points are bogus their is no neutering of feedback it has the same economic damage as it always has and equal to a type 3 flag. It is more dangerous now since there is a lesser threshold required to slap red around ....like your fucked up moronic strawman excuse for slathering it on people since your unlikely return.

I think we can safely ignore your pleas to keep the status quo lauda.
71  Other / Meta / Re: bitcointalk.org is DEATH on: January 03, 2020, 11:59:17 PM
If he had responded to your post with factual evidence justifying how and why those merits and trusts were received and given, we all would have seen the post. We all could have made an opinion about it but the evidence you have captured speaks volumes about what the OP is actually doing and how can any member simply accept it without pointing it out to him?
I was looking forward to read his reasoning why he included those people indeed. I got off-topic posts instead:
I've deleted wolwoo's off-topic posts. This topic isn't meant to just post a Trust list. Wolwoo is welcome to post again if he can add his reasons for the exclusions:
Share yours
I encourage everyone to keep track of the reasons behind their own exclusions too.
I don't think it's helpful to create many topics on this, feel free to use 1 post here for yours (including reasons), and I'll link it from the next post.
I can't wait to see "retaliation" as a reason instead of valid thoughtful reasons that are worthy of being on DT.
As a bonus, he did prove me right that he bases his Trust on retaliation.

Yes the OP did prove you right with regards to retaliation but he has nothing else to offer other than being aggressive, foul-mouthed, argumentative and condescending.

He should have at least taken the opportunity to try to clearly and calmly debate the case against him by providing facts and evidence to counter the evidence you presented so the debate could take place in a healthy environment. Instead he used an online-translator to post the following very colourful language:

Let's get to the topic,
Mr Loycev
Why do you support the bastards who put me and the signatories like me under suspicion?
open the title and ban all yobit signers. doesn't your ass eat?


Or is it easier for me to deal with because I'm the only one?

Can't you and your dog-henchmen scare me?





Are you PUSHING DOUBLE STANDARDS YES OR NO??

The initial poster is clearly CORRECT to respond to you and CORRECTLY state you are untrustworthy if YOU ARE. This is his DUTY not to be written off as retaliation LOL ... relying on robovac to dream you up an excuse is a SURE RECIPE FOR failure , that dunce is only good for copy and paste raw data spew right?? and eating scammer ass.

Hey policeman says alice, bob stole my phone again. Hmmmm says the DT policeman aka agent foxpoop, are you just reporting and making this known out of RETALIATION that is not allowed by the way.. LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Don't forget alice if you told him you were coming here to report him we will also need to slap you with blackmail and extortion again hahahahaahahah


Here prove you are not pushing double standards.

Red tag now these members THEY ARE WEARING YOBIT SIGS . Failure to red tag them demonstrates you are untrustworthy for pushing double standards It is impossible to deny. I will bring more after you red tag these members to prove you are not pushing double standards

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=355846  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=623643

these are just 2 I found in a few seconds I will be adding more.

FAILURE to red tag them means you are corrupt and pushing double standards there can be no denial of this.

LAUDA and moronbozo often work together and are confirmed croatian trust abusers who likely are from the same deeply polluted gene pool.

Let me know when it is done. The initial poster has EVERY RIGHT to be pissed off and engage you in any way he feels he wants to if you refuse.

What is the point of being a " scam hunter" if you give free passes to your pals?? this makes you look even worse than doing nothing.

You will become like mosprognoz who suchmoon correctly notes CALLS OUT SCAMS then wants to work with them to make " lots of money " LOL

Scam hunting the perfect cover for scammers and double standards pushers.

I have no immediate beef with you but you can not be permitted to go around slamming double standards on people. Sort it out stop jumping on the low functioning spew excuses robovac sharts out for you that will always collapse under the slightest scrutiny.

LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE RED TAGGED THESE MEMBERS AND I WILL BRING YOU SOME OTHERS.

Hiding behind he is angry at clear double standards being pushed on him, and he does not speak perfect english is pathetic.

When are you flagging mosprognoz and lauda for wanting to work with projects you CLAIM are 100% scams??

Scam hunters with double standards are MORE high risk that people that don't hunt scams at all obviously.

This is not me attacking you full on this is me telling you that you need to ensure you don't push double standards and create a 2 tier system. You still have time to fix your shit before you go on the KNOWING AND WILLFUL SCAMMERS and scammer supporters list.  Either punish or do not punish but making it fucking consistent or you are a scammer yourself that is NOT something you can deny. You can not pretend a certain behavior deserves RED TRUST for one person and NOT another.

Why are you not flagging mosprognoz for his actions here?? this involves behavior with a SCAM you are 100 % sure about?? Don't make me look for it ask suchmoon she was all over it and presented more damning evidence of this.

This is a thread specifically about your actions so you need to start making sure you have a very clean and CONSISTENT sheet or else that needs to be constantly talked about.

The initial poster has EVERY RIGHT to be aggressive and pissed off  if you are SINGLING him out for punishment you refuse to give to others.
72  Other / Meta / Re: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? on: January 03, 2020, 10:34:58 PM
Me tagging Lauda would be unlikely to make them unqualified for their signature deal..
Lauda loosing their signature deal probably wouldn't change anything anyway.. You think they will just leave if they can't get paid for a signature?
Red-tagging has nothing to do with being "removed" either..

I also do not necessarily think that Lauda is all that high risk to trade with..
I highly doubt Lauda would scam on any simple trades or deals up to quite a high value, say up to around $10k, though I don't think they are a very good choice for an escrow or to be given very large exit scam opportunities anymore, but very few are up to that mark..


I highly doubt Lauda actually thinks that I myself am a high risk to trade with either.. Do you @Lauda?
Lauda do you think I would really scam over $100 or even $1k?


Where I do not trust Lauda is to be in charge/in influence of making the "laws", setting community standards/precedents, and wielding power over others..
As a matter of fact actually, I would trust Lauda to do just about exactly what they say they would do, which consists of banning/tagging/shutting up/exiling anyone that disagrees with them and greatly limiting the freedom of users in general, based on my interpretation of their statements and actions against users..

Please read my post again and understand lauda losing his own sig is of little importance. Laudas removal however can be leveraged by the removal of his supporters sig or threat there of. This SIG business is but 1 tiny part of the arsenal one will need to adopt to have such scammers removed.  Just because lauda would not scam a person in a trade ( this is in doubt with large amounts) matters not. His prior history has MORE than enough to ensure he should be kept well away from the trust system. Are we that desperate we NEED those that have scammed, supported other scammers, worked with other scammers on a highly probable extortion, shady ecrowing, trust abuse?? ffs we only need 100 people here out of 100's of 1000s lol. There is NO reason for him NOT to be tagged red. Fortune jack are employing SCAMMERS this can and should be leveraged.

Why ask lauda a question in public, a liar and scammer/extortionist will simply say whatever suits them best. Do you really need to feel validated and trusted by a scammer. That is like an anti reference?

We don't need to have opinions, lauda has scammed and has so much dirt there in black and white there is no sensible reason not to red tag him. I mean if he does not meet the threshold for a tag LOL who the fuck does haha..  He won't pull of a small scam. I see so that fact there is irrefutable proof of scamming and STRONG evidence to suggest he was going for a nice big extortion or  huge escrow scam is OKAY??

All the other manipulations and collusions and DT entrenchment ON TOP is not even needed to know he should be banned let alone red tagged.

Anyway eddie we don't want to appear hostile to you (because we are not) but you will not see these scammers and trust abusers kicked out or even brought in line by talk alone. Organised action is your only hope. We will revisit when we come back in a years time after reaching our 1000 post. They will still be here and the forum will be more of a warzone and more of an echo chamber.

Economic pressure is a large leverage here. Most of these bums are broke so their chipmixer sigs dust are life blood to them. I mean they have been here years some of them and still broke down bums. This is the kind of people you are dealing with. Do not reason as if they had btc like yourself behind them and economic concerns are NOT PRIMARY. They are to them.

Transparent objective rules enforced equally on all members is the only satisfactory goal. No 2 tier system.

There is a temptation for some I know to try to win back favor of these controlling bunch. That is a shame (not you eddie but some others). I think theymos is part to blame 1/ merit cancer/ 2 leaving the old feedback system, 3/ not punishing trust abusers and scammers harder. This gives a bad signal to members they fear standing against the core bunch of scum AS BOTH VOD AND LFC BITCOIN have admitted in public. Fear of this group must be smashed.

Anyway I have given you my opinion, if you still believe it is a poor path to follow then continue your own way.  Trust abuse will be stopped through deterrent of retribution or theymos. FOrget theymos he is not going to help or would have done so by now. It is true the core group may collapse alone through greed and disagreement but they no their power depends on collusion so that is NOT going to happen imho.

I will only reply if you query anything I have said here. If not fine, try your own way. So long as you goal is to kick double standards and punish only scammers and financially dangerous it is good you are trying anything. So we salute that. As we say we do not mean to oppose you personally eddie







73  Other / Meta / Re: bitcointalk.org is DEATH on: January 03, 2020, 10:01:20 PM
If he had responded to your post with factual evidence justifying how and why those merits and trusts were received and given, we all would have seen the post. We all could have made an opinion about it but the evidence you have captured speaks volumes about what the OP is actually doing and how can any member simply accept it without pointing it out to him?
I was looking forward to read his reasoning why he included those people indeed. I got off-topic posts instead:
I've deleted wolwoo's off-topic posts. This topic isn't meant to just post a Trust list. Wolwoo is welcome to post again if he can add his reasons for the exclusions:
Share yours
I encourage everyone to keep track of the reasons behind their own exclusions too.
I don't think it's helpful to create many topics on this, feel free to use 1 post here for yours (including reasons), and I'll link it from the next post.
I can't wait to see "retaliation" as a reason instead of valid thoughtful reasons that are worthy of being on DT.
As a bonus, he did prove me right that he bases his Trust on retaliation.

LOL at prove.

As usual most of your logic is completely BROKEN and low functioning.

1. I agree those promoting or enabling the advertising of scams  knowingle- once made aware ( 1 warning to remove) should be red tagged if they fail to remove the sig. I class yobit as a high risk bordering on scam site. HOWEVER this must go for ALL members I see some DT wearing that same sig with NO RED TAGS.  So if this is NOT universally imposed then that can not be a rule that should be enforced. Sure you will argue some will slip through the net, but even when you present this evidence if they are DT they are ALLOWED to continue unpunished. Like in the case of account selling with nutildah but people still flag up people for putting their accounts up for sale. Bogus and therefore can NOT be imposed as a universal rule. Until it is then people have the right to say fuck off to double standards. IF double standards are pushed on them THAT IS UNTRUSTWORTHY AND SCAMMING in most cases. You either believe something is WRONG or it is NOT WRONG. That does not depend on who does it.

2. Your point about retaliation is NULL and void if you are doing NOTHING wrong. If someone excludes you or red tags you when you are doing nothing wrong then they are certainly showing at a minimum POOR judgement and perhaps scamming people with double standards and taking these actions for personal gain which is clearly untrustworthy. This NO RETALIATION argument is bogus. Sure if you are busted doing something clearly WRONG that is  universally punished here as a clear consistent rule then to respond or attack in return is wrong because those tagging or excluding you are NOT untrustworthy they are enforcing a universal rule. If someone punishes you WRONGLY or is imposing double standards you MUST RESPOND to warn the community. LOL at no retaliation.

3. I mean asking ANYONE why they MAY decided to NOT include a bunch of people with documented and undeniable instances of clear financially motivated wrong doing is just hilarious. Asking him that as if it was a strange move just further makes you look foolish. I mean did you mean to write why would anyone  NOT exclude a bunch of people that are undeniable scammer or scammer supporters.Well done wolwoo that exclusions list looks almost 100% SPOT ON.

I feel people are again using selective enforcement against the initial poster, I feel loyce looks the other way for scammers and his other shady pals that cycle merit and trust and all include each other on DT then while trying to sound neutral scuppers and cries out if anyone tries to mount any challenge against them.

ROBOVAC is spamming away his chipmixer sig, praising tmans swearing and tourettes crap as poetry  then crying if others are rude of they are trolls if they dare alter the persons nick name (although those same people do it to others constantly). He loves double standards and pretending to take the high moral ground and be neutral. Fucker is a sniping sneaky dangerous little shit.

I think the initial poster is being discriminated against clearly.  Get red tagging EVERY member pushing this sig, and start scrutinizing EVERY members trust exclusions, inclusions , merit cycling to PALS the same and we can retract this.

I think he actual means the forums sense of fair play and sense of free speech is dead. To those that want to get on and aim for legendary and sigs and trading this is undeniably TRUE. You will be only getting there if you toe the controllers line and support them.

Merit cancer killed this forum. Basing trust upon it was insanity. The inital poster simply does not explain himself clearly enough sometimes but his core points have undeniable value.

There is truth in the initial posters post history. He needs to simply improve his ability to express his thoughts and keep emotion out of it as much as possible. Of course when you are being discriminated against and double standards pushed on you and punished by those that are far more dirty this is HARD.

Don't give up initial poster we salute those that will not be taken down quietly keep on fighting back. Those with backbone are in very short supply here.

Bitcointalk.org will never die, but the environment here has change a lot for the WORSE over the last 8 years for sure. It is still going down hill in terms of free speech and fair opportunities for all. Transparency and objectivity needs to replace this subjective back room collusion laden mess.

You can not dispel truth and observable instances of wrong doing because they are presented in an aggressive tone?? that is moronic. WRONG DOING IS WRONG DOING. Double standards is double standards.

You can fix your shit though as yet you are not a confirmed scammer or willing scam facilitator for pals or out of fear. DO the right thing IN ALL CASES.
74  Other / Meta / Re: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? on: January 03, 2020, 09:02:12 PM
What is wrong with you eddie and techshare, get this cunt lauda glowing red
get their sigs removed

What would that accomplish other than a brief satisfaction of a limited set of users?
I think attacks and "retaliation" like that are generally used when an opponent runs out of, or has a lack of, pertinent information and logic to back their case as ad hominem charactor assassination attempts usually..

"ad hominem"=directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
I'm after the position, not any person..

It may look like a short term win, or successful hit, but in the long term truth and logic are much more effective, and I believe sending redtags would just degrade the image and credibility of intelligence presented..

I don't care about removing Lauda's or anyone's signatures.. I am not looking to personally destroy anyone like that.. They can shitpost for sig pay all they want for all I care..

It's about the credibility of DT and influence over the direction of DT.. Not some users profiles..

These points have "some" small merit. However most are words of someone that does not understand this forum and certainly NOT the mechanisms upon which the systems of control are based.

1. lauda is a confirmed scammer. He is a confirmed trust abuser (scamming). He is a highly probable extortionist. He has run a very shady looking escrow. He supports other proven scammers.  Reduce the credibility of the TRUST system HOW exactly? NOT giving red trust to these types of dangerous scum bags is REDUCING the value of the trust system.  How can you even claim that giving someone as blatantly untrustworthy and dangerous as lauda would DEVALUE the trust system. That is pure crazy talk.

This ALONE is 100% reason he should be glowing red. You are meant to be warning other honest members right about those that have demonstrated they are willing to lie, trust abuse, extort and use shady escrow for their person financial gain??

Ad hominem?  calling  a confirmed scammer a scammer is NOT ad hominem. When you are using the context of the TRUST system.

2. True that short of changing a broken system of control you will not PREVENT a recurrence of the same for 100% certain. Lauda and his cronies are but a symptom of the system. However since you are NOT  controlling the mechanisms on which the system works then you will need to understand that the SYSTEM itself DEMANDS retribution and friction to function. By removing them SHORT TERM it will send a message that scammers and those willingly and knowingly supporting scammers and their trust abuse will be REMOVED if they behave in that way.

3. You Fail to understand the trust system is ECONOMIC punishment for 99% of members. Do really believe that if there was no ECONOMIC consequences that anyone would give a shit about any of this LOL.  Your ONLY hope of removing trust abusers and scammers that are in DT and willing to continue trust abusing and doing whatever they can to hold on to their LUCRATIVE positions is chopping their support away. a/ chop into their projects for hiring these types, b/ refusing to produce transparent and open rules for campaign acceptance/denial  c/ using the gamed metrics of merit and trust that the SAME PEOPLE CONTROL THAT TAKE ALL THE TOP SPOTS.  Chop away at those supporting them and those projects funding them. That is your ONLY hope.

Like the school bullies that slap you around and you are only willing to wipe some of your tears on them in retaliation, NO UPPERCUT the bitches right in the fucking face so their is something to deter them or just keep getting abused. Head teacher is not going to help and neither are the bullies pals.

Talking back is  better than most are willing to do so we salute that but you will need to unite, organize and take action. They system RELIES ON THIS. DT is no place for those that dare not use the system as DESIGNED. The design is poor enough to have gifted a bunch of scum a huge entrenched advantage but they know to collude and take action whilst most just sit there moaning and crying. If we were on DT they would all be glowing red and stripped of their sigs until they start understanding you don't use the trust system to hide your past scamming deeds and punish whistle blowers. You don't actually get to be a scammer and be on DT and take the best sig spots. Scammers get tagged, innocent honest members do not. Honest member that are great contributors get the BEST SIG SPOTs.

Sensible transparent clear rules that apply equally to all members.

Trust abuse will not magically stop by moaning about it.

I see that by  sounding very reasonable and mild mannered you "think" that you will garner support some day from the out circle that entrench the core. I do NOT think that is possible.

For those like us that do not need or care about sigs your points MAY have more validity (not the refusal to tag scammers and extortionists and flagrant trust abusers) but you are talking about less than 1% of the board. They are recruiting from the 99% you are and already out number you and are entrenched will self cycled merits. Those odds are ...well I'm sure you see.

lauda primarily trust abuses when

a/ you mention observable scammy or shady instances in his past
b/ you mention observable scammy or shady instances in his supporters pasts
c/ you defend those that have PREVIOUSLY themselves highlighted his scammy, extorting and trust abusing ways.

He does this to prevent other members finding out he is dirty and indeed financially super high risk.  Allowing this to continue without tagging him red as a warning is certainly high risk.

Man up and fight back with all the tools the broken systems have given you , since you will not fix the systems themselves. Only theymos can do that and he seems intent of GIVING more advantage to those that collude and control merit not less. If the 250 threshold is ever increased (without fixing merit) you can only conclude theymos is crazy, stupid or complicit.
We draw close to our 1000 post . Then we will likely decide to leave for another task. If we return in one year and it is still the same core of scammy trust abusers and their supporters then they board is pretty much dead in terms of free speech on certain subjects (not hate speech)

Allowing people to shit post for pay at the highest rates whilst having scammed and facilitated scams, whilst other honest members who don't shit post can not post and be rewarded is the OPPOSITE of a meritocracy. That is like the worst possible environment for a forum. Some would call that sub optimal. We say it is a fucking cluster fuck.

We like you eddie but for DT to have a chance and this forum to have an optimal free and fair meritocracy where all members are given equal chance and opportunity, you need people in DT that will take affirmative action when it is clearly required. Bullies are only kept in check by those that are willing to ensure that their gains are = or less than their losses for abuse.  If their net gain is still more than their loss or punishment they will never stop.
75  Other / Meta / Re: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? on: January 03, 2020, 04:26:13 PM
Want to know how I can tell that your arguments are breaking down?  It's easy; you start to sound a lot like cryptohunter.  

You never answered my question. If I am to perform what is arguably a public service of dispute mediation, exactly what do I need to meet your fine and arbitrary standards

I acknowledge that my standards are mine and mine alone, they do not necessarily reflect the position of the forum, forum administration, forum staff, moderators, any other DT1 members.  Hell, they don't reflect the thoughts of anyone but me.  Got it?  Good.

1. Don't be a dick.
2. Don't pad your trust list to boost your own trust score.
3. Don't expect trust list reciprocation.
4. Don't use the trust list for retaliation.

And finally; the only one that really matters:
5. Demonstrate good judgement, good character, and restraint.

LOL but cryptohunter caved your retarded skull in every single time that you tried to rebut any of his points " mr opposite of facts" lol

What is the point of making these kind of statements that demonstrate absolutely nothing except your deranged view of reality ??
Have you not recognized that you direposter are just some broke ass noob with no skin in this game at all? stfu because you have achieved nothing (except trying to rip off people even less well of than yourself with crazy rates of interest) keep spamming your sig for dust and trying to sound smart so we can keep laughing at you whilst we enjoy our lavish lifestyle.

These are pretty much your groundless opinions, the rest are observable double standards that you should be spouting in the direction of your master lauda.

Lauda is a trust abuser. This is undeniable. Lauda is a scamer this is undeniable. You are found supporting him and other scumbags this is undeniable

Direposting burger flipper is one of his most ardent supporters. He should be removed along with lauda tman and nutildah. Those 3 are clear scammers and scam facilitators but those that support their actions regardless of how flagrantly they endanger honest members.

Direposter is some worthless peasant that now tries to loan shark others even worse off with ludicrous rates of interest for the dust he lends out. Scumbag.

Lauda will be a pariah, and you will be a pariah. It is only a matter of time. Meantime I will just deride and stuff your double standards back down your throat whenever I like.

LOL at don't use the trust list for retaliation, don't use red tags as retaliation. Just sit there and take it up the ass like a good little pussy.

Tag Lauda for trust abuse and the LONG list of scamming, extorting and other undeniable shady shit, same for tman and any other of these ass licking dregs that suck up to them like direwolf et al.  Stop with the neutrals and mild complaints.

Cut away the core group from beneath. Slap them with some red then we pull their sigs off. Watch them start crying. Pharmacist will squeal if his chipmixer is  removed.  Support scammers and trust abusers, you get red.

Lauda has multiple instances of undeniable trust abuse and scamming. How is there only 1 red tag from DT?? fucking bunch of crybaby wretches. What is wrong with you eddie and techshare, get this cunt lauda glowing red and tman, nutildah and any other scammer supporter or trust abuser. Then we get their sigs removed or we bust their projects for scamming and double standards.  Neutrals in return for reds?? what's the point.

Err no retaliation LOLOLOLOL so if you trust abuse someone first then they can never give you red because " no retaliation"??  ahahah

Trust abuse in many cases = scamming. It is deception (claiming untrustworthy when not) for their own person/financial gain. Red tag this scumbag core. Get me on DT I will red tag each and every one of these scammers and their supporters.  Lauda is only there doing this with others support him and include him on DT. Anyone including lauda on DT is untrustworthy clearly.

Lauda is claiming THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TRUST ABUSE. If the scamming rat is not punished other than us slathering the board up with his past scamming deeds and hounding the cunt then perhaps he will turn out to be correct. Start crushing him in all possible ways and his  rev streams or he will just keep scamming and trust abusing.
76  Economy / Reputation / Re: More abuse by TECSHARE NSFW reee(sponse) on: January 02, 2020, 08:24:40 PM
You are funny. Ranting racist bullshit and whining about how unfair life is. Yawn. Go fuck yourself CH - YOU are the scumbag here, get a clue. Roll Eyes

Really the initial post looks like a groundless rant.

Racist?? these are croatians right?? you are some bulgarian scumbag skank right?? who cares, nothing RACIST about mentioning your heritage shit for brains.

Crying racist whilst screaming pajeet at others Okay fool. I think it is racist that you even suggested it was racist to call them croatian dogs, what if I called them US dogs?? are you saying just because I called them croatian (like they are) that this is a negative thing?? are you racist owlcatz??? do you feel croatian is a negative ?? sounds very racist to me.

What a shock seeing you here supporting moron bozo and your old extortionist pal LAUDA  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

Still, anyway keep on topic please owlcatz.

I state again the initial post is completely insane and some crazy excuse for giving TS red trust. I see not clear evidence suggesting TS should have red at all??

This just seems like MORE use of the trust system for personal retribution.


Moronbozo has a history of giving out red trust for strange reasons. He also has a history of supporting his croatian dog pal Lauda.

You stop crying bulgarian biatch.

The reader can stick to reading the bolded parts if they strictly want to have insight into the initial post and make up their own minds.

77  Economy / Reputation / nullius aka noobius non achieving flowery worded non achieving LIAR on: January 02, 2020, 07:00:02 PM
So we have the "famed" (by retards) nullius (suddenly out of retirement did anyone check the password change) making a comeback to find some SPURIOUS case based on some fucktarded logic and some mental gymnastics to give red trust to cryptohunter (whilst admitting he is on thin ice/ thin  line) WHILST IGNORING HIS SCAMMING PALS FAR MORE DANGEROUS ACTIONS.

Some say this account is now held by no other than LAUDA ...guess who is straight there to give the post 20 merits?? HMMM all looks kind of suspect. Let's pull this prick apart and get him on the dirty turds thread to compare this OUTRAGE at CH's REAL ACTIONS in the FULL CONTEXT compared to the clear observable instances of these scamming scumbags undeniable financially motivated wrong doing.

Come here noobius and explain. Cut the flowery over done presentation. We will slice right though that to pull apart your bullshit.

I see nothing in your post history but bunches of conceited crap that if it never existed then nothing would be ANY DIFFERENT AT ALL here.

I see a scammer supporter and self debunking retard that is about to be publicly trashed.

The guy is a fucking moron. He claims CH is out of order for calling out Pharmacist for lecturing others on financially motivated shit posting.... whilst clearly having done this himself under a socky HugeBlackWoman. Don't see CH giving TP any red trust I see him saying STFU that is double standards that is it. That is after TP was attacking CH anyway not like noobius tries to claim.

Then noobius claims this means that CH saying that scammers sitting around here making bingo games and taking the piss out of excuses of peasants ( nullius a self confessed peasant himself that was often hungry and obviously stunted his mental development) for at times only posting helpful guides or their own projects twitter posts on their relevant threads in many cases NOT financially motivated CandP, whilst these scammers are there begging for their own plagiarizing PALS like chibitchity (or whatever that financially motivated plagiarists name is) to be REINSTATED when he admitted it was clearly financially motivated plagiarism... IS OUT OF ORDER , double standards and disgusting. That the board should be taking note that scammers sitting around taking this piss out of peasants for lesser evils (in some cases) should be pointed out for the double standards bullshit it was.

Noobius tries to claim CH is saying plagiarism is okay for poor people. That is TOTAL BULLSHIT. He is saying clearly ...well what we have just said above^^^ I mean he is either trying to deliberately misrepresent CH actions or is too fucking dumb to understand what CH is saying in the full context. Either way fucking retard or fucking scammer supporting piece of shit...we don't really care.

MAKES CH SUPER UNTRUSTWORTHY for making a sensible and clear comparison of clear double standards and how the focus was totally ones sided and selective. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

This fucking idiot nullius is some techno nerd that makes you believe he is super smart because he sits in his mud hut starving with some broken computers from the 90s whilst taking forever posting his flowery sounding crap.

Let him come here and face us and answer our questions fucking scammer supporting little prick. Like he just came back after all this time to dream this up and make himself look super fucking hypocritical and moronic.

As if CH gives one shit about this noobs cucking to lauda et al ...........one red trust or 100x red trust what is the fucking difference. The entire feedback system is now and always has been a complete joke. Type 2 and type 3 flags are the only credible warnings. The rest is dangerously misleading garbage that places the honest members in greater danger and serves to enrich the some of the biggest and most dangerous scammers here.

Noobius we are here to demonstrate flowery sounding weasels are NOTHING. We eat those for breakfast. You were best to have stayed far away. The fabled nullius will be crushed wait and see fool.

Anyone not bringing observable instances to support their points are going to be deleted. No more bogus opinions ...bring your corroborating evidence or fuck off.
78  Economy / Reputation / Re: More abuse by TECSHARE NSFW reee(sponse) on: January 02, 2020, 06:31:04 PM
A gift that keeps on giving, especially now that CH is inside.

Some say lauda controls the nullius account.
All hail the creation of the moronbozo-noobius-Lauda[1] hybrid.

Hurry up and flag this account this is to serve as a honey pot for all the scammers and scammer supporters here.
Requesting to flag nullius me for starting a thread. Cast a merit, throw a negative, and boom: drama gets created everywhere.  Cheesy

[1] What's my given nickname by CH?

Inside your mothers ass pipe?  Is that what you mean you croatian dog??

Two croatian dogs yapping away at each other.

Where is the abuse by TS? the OP makes no coherent point ??  The post is about moronbozo suffering from amebic dysentery ?? this is common place where you are right??
Also since lauda controls you with his fist in your ass this will likely explain why you walk around leaking shit 24/7 when he roughly removes it.

Seems like trust abuse from moronbozo against TS with NO REFERENCE of clear example or justification of his claims.

They are getting desperate now it seems the inner core of scumbags here.



79  Economy / Reputation / Re: Plagiarism apologist #92110 “cryptohunter” rationalized dishonesty in principle on: January 02, 2020, 04:51:50 PM
I did not intend for the following to be a post.  It started as a simple observation on the trustworthiness of a user, then grew into an opinion that I think should set precedent in what is effectually the Bitcoin Forum’s common law on use the trust system.

In that light, I must emphasize the narrowness this opinion.  I think it would be a massively destructive abuse of the trust system to use it to, say, punish people for their political opinions.  The trust system is in effect an economic weapon; and the use of economic weapons to enforce groupthink is odious.  E.g., nowadays, there are places where you can be fired from your job for using the correct pronouns, or making simple, factual observations about reality—let alone expressing the “wrong” opinions.

In the general case, if I see on this forum an opinion that I think is wrong, even horribly wrong, my reaction is either to say why it’s wrong, or to ignore it as garbage.  I may sometimes personally avoid transacting with people I disagree with, in the manner of a quiet boycott; but there are even many people on this forum whose opinions I find disagreeable, with whom I would have no qualms about transacting financially.

By contrast, what I hereby consider is an opinion that directly, unavoidably, substantively demonstrates the untrustworthiness of he who expresses it.  Is it untrustworthy behaviour to demand that scammy, dishonest people should not be shamed?  I say, yes!

It would be interesting to see some intelligent analysis and critique.  I admit it’s arguable whether this is a good idea, for I am walking a thin, dangerous line.  However, I sincerely, unarguably, and unalterably distrust this user, for the reasons stated below; and what is the purpose of the trust system, if it is not for expressing a well-founded distrust so as to warn others?

[The following is what I intended to use as a trust comment.  It invoked an error:  “Comment too long.  Create a topic and link to it instead.  A draft was saved.”  In my actual trust rating, it will be replaced with a link to this topic.]

Quote from: nullius

In the linked post and subsequent posts on the same thread, #92110 “cryptohunter” rationalized and morally minimized plagiarism.  He did this with no apparent direct self-interest; judging only by the thread on its face, he appears to have done this to protect plagiarists from shame *as a matter of principle*.  #92110 admits that plagiarists “need to be banned”, but vehemently objects to shaming them with ridicule.  For the purpose of judging trustworthiness, all this only makes him worse.

A.

Unlike copyright law violations, plagiarism is truly the theft of ideas.  It is singularly the most reprehensible wrong that can be committed within the realm of the intellect; and it is inherently fraudulent, an intellectual scam by definition.

Thus, anybody who defends, excuses, or morally minimizes plagiarism in principle is *ipso facto* untrustworthy.  Anybody who considers plagiarism not shameful is definitely untrustworthy.  And this applies a thousandfold to anybody who attempts to manipulate the emotional sympathies of the public to stop social shaming of plagiarists:  It is no less than an attempt to protect fraudulent criminals by depriving a community of a needed weapon, i.e. social shame, that the community uses to defend itself.

Perhaps worst of all in concept, this last is hereby seen done via a values inversion that shames the people who are shaming dishonest, fraudulent plagiarists.  Further down the thread, #92110 even has the audacity to issue a preachy, self-righteous tirade disparaging and ridiculing the “moral compass” and “critical decision making capabilities” of The Pharmacist:  The latter has no sympathy for poor, desperate plagiarists who are being deterred by public shaming from the forum and its financial opportunities.  Evidently, he expects for The Pharmacist to be ashamed.  (I do not hereby reach #92110’s other arguments, other to note that they are are completely wrong.)

B.

There are instances in which a disagreeable opinion is just that, and reveals little or nothing about the trustworthiness of the holder of that opinion for financial transactions.  I absolutely would not issue a negative trust rating in those instances.  This is not one of those instances.  The linked post is tantamount to a self-righteous declaration that “even though [scammers] need to be banned I can't say I have no idea why they do this”, and they shouldn’t be shamed for ripping people off, especially if they are “poor as fuck” or have “semi legit reasons” (!).

Indeed, substitute the word “scammer” for “plagiarist” in the context of the linked discussion, and you will immediately see why I have chosen to tag #92110 as untrustworthy for financial transactions.  I would not trust a plagiarism apologist with even a millisatoshi.

Coda

I see that #92110 is accused by others of abusing alts.  If/when I have time for the needed investigation, I should issue a negative trust rating to any alts that I independently verify actually belong to the same person(s).  It’s low on my priorities list, but I hope that I will get to it eventually.

Archival link:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200101215600/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5084319.0;all

What an obvious scammer supporting shit stain we have here.

1. noobius does not have a miilisatoshi so it matters little to cryptohunter we are sure

2. this dumb fuck expects us to believe he scanned through all of cryptohunters posts failed to notice that he missed the part where CH demonstrated clearly demonstrated that undeniable scammers that were far more financially high risk than these turd word desperados were celebrating their punishment which in many cases seemed very heavy handed. WHEN THESE SAME scammers were begging for their pal chibitchity to be REINSTATED for deliberate sneaky financially motivated plagiarism.

I mean noobius likes to sound smart, but reveals himself clearly as a fucking hypocrite and shit stain scammer supporter. Where are the red tags on the proven scammers and willing scam facilitators that CH spend the last part of his posts highlighting??

The point CH was clearly making (and only really for instances where the "copy and paste" bullshit looked either innocent or NOT for direct financial gain ) is that bunches of scammers and scammer supporters sitting around making up bingo games regarding excuses from copy and past nothing burgers whilst themselves posing far greater financial danger to the forum was HYPOCRISY.

This noobius is clearly the one demonstrating he is UNTRUSTWORTHY and a far greater danger to the forum.  Get red flagging the people on the dirty turds thread noobius you moronic piece of shit.

Nice to put this fucktard in our sights though and see his true colors. Look forward to plenty of public destruction scumbag. Fancy words and " sounding smart" won't stop us pulling you apart in debate.

Look forward to your own thread noobius.

Those that SPEND THEIR TIME looking to punish small time petty shit whilst IGNORING the more dangerous scammers here are the REAL scumbags. Noobius is one of those.

Some say lauda controls the nullius account. That seems plausible both like to "sound" smart whilst it is easy to crush their stupid minds in real debate. Fancy over done wordy posts mean nothing once you start pulling them apart piece by piece.

Glad we have another dreg to pull apart and crush whenever we like. Well another alt of some idiot like lauda anyway.

Hurry up and flag this account this is to serve as a honey pot for all the scammers and scammer supporters here.

What is EVEN more amusing about this is that noobius does not notice that those making the bingo and taking the piss out of SOME MEMBERS that were banned for copy and paste that WAS not financially motivated, and was just some copy and paste of their own projects twitter annoucements or some other non financially motivated and helpful copy and paste ....THOSE SAME PEOPLE were BEGGING for the REINSTATEMENT of their pal chibitchity or whatever the fuck this campaign scammers name was WHO ADMITTED HE COPY AND PASTE FOR FINANCIAL GAIN. LOL

I see people here are easily swayed by noobius flowery waffle. He is a fucking computer nerd that can push out some flowery crap that "sounds impressive" to idiots.
Watch how we will crush this fucking scumbag in real debate.

He is misrepresenting and pulling CH's words out of their full context. Whilst demonstrating his purpose is NOT to increase the safety of members here at all. He glances straight past the far more damning and dangerous actions of his scamming pals like lauda (who is awarding nullius 20 merits) LOL

LOOK at robovac still crying with his 20 merits that CH demonstrated clearly

1. he is a 1 trick raw stats pony who starts crying when CH smashed its dumb face in on the merit cycling debates
2. a stupid bitch who kisses up to tmans swearing , cursing and generally low level tourettes laded spew then cries trolling and tears any anyone else who is "rude"


Oh look a self moderated thread. That is supposed to be a big no no here ....well when it suits them.

Noobius?? who??? who the fuck is this guy? can you bring his big achievements here please so we can have a good laugh at them?? just another nobody

A fucking NOBODY with some flowery shit nerd speak to impress idiots. Sounding smart to imbeciles is one thing. This noob fool even daring to mention a real achiever like CH is a joke.  Go sell your polished gibberish elsewhere cos we will expose it for the low functioning spew it is.
80  Other / Meta / Re: IS GIVING RED-TRUST THAT NON-EXPLANATORY ? on: January 02, 2020, 04:23:12 PM
I was tagged once because I have sent merit to post, it is not cool. Good thing is that person who sent me negative removed it.

Why would you merit post where Tec's hare calls lauda scammer and you defend OG when other users call him out and you don't send them merit?

Makes no sense, double standards.
LOL


Firstly Moronbozo you need to keep away from complex concepts like double standards. You clearly do not have the capacity to grasp the REAL meaning of such things.

Lauda is a PROVEN trust abuser. Giving red trust to a person on the basis they are meriting a high value post that is NOT conclusively proven false or misleading (actually it looks to be of high value) is obviously trust abuse.

You (we believe) were tagged for giving merit to a post that DOXED the forum treasurer which is kind of like condoning this rule breaking dangerous (financially clearly since he was then holding millions of USD for the forum)  behavior. This is not equivalent to the behavior of  hacker AT ALL.

Also Lauda is a PROVEN scammer and scam pusher. He is also strongly implicated in MANY shady examples of financially motivated wrong doing. So again this is NOT equivalent to OG where there is no conclusive proof.

So it is clear that Lauda is once again abusing trust, and the double standards are just a figment of your moronic broken mind.

The board needs to start also noting down those that will support ANY action of trust abuse or CLEAR financially motivated wrong doing that is undeniably placing other honest members at higher risk. Direwolf, moronbozo, nutildah micgoosens and plenty more now including JJG these ALWAYS seem to be on the side of trust abusers or scammers.

Bottom line is this is clearly again the trust system being used for PERSONAL gain /retribution that has nothing AT ALL to do with protecting the honest members here from scammers and those with undeniable observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing (lauda et al).

Clearly though as with merit "feedback" will always be abused since there is no criteria and can be weaponized for personal gain. Poor design = poor results.

Lauda has a long documented history of using red trust to silence others presenting observable instances from his own dirty history here TRUST ABUSE. Problem is nobody gives one shit until he does this to them. LOL
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!