Thanks for bump everyone (especially shill TECSHARE), may I remind You that it is against forum rules to just bump topic created by other users, but as this topic is selectively moderated who gives a fuck anyway. |
|
|
|
Hacker1001101001's probable bump spamming should have been apparent to the admins when he was unbanned
He is exposed ICO bump service, read again topic where you already expressed your opinion about hacker: I had suspected that hacker1001.. was a bought account. IIRC, he kinda came out of nowhere and lent money to marcotheminer.
I think him previously being an ICO bump spammer would support the above.
There was signed message from hacker (address is "active" btw), so fake review spam business. Which rule am I breaking ?
You have long history of breaking forum rules. I am already experiencing pretty harsh 2 years of signature ban for the rule I broke about Plagiarism
Pretty harsh? You got very soft "punishment" for things you did and maybe you are still doing, liar. |
|
|
|
So my advice, is to write a an appeal post using this template (ChiBitCTY vs BAN helped by yogg) :
Stop spamming this topic and read previous page. I just talked with Regulus on whatsapp and can confirm that he still have desire to come back to the forum and to write posts.
That's a good news, so I ask those who can resolve this situation to take action and treat all members as equals - give man a second chance. Just one example of how ban appeal is resolved in less than 60 minutes after is posted : Ban Appeal for over 5-year old accountThe more is presented, the more is the staff's bias becoming obvious.  Did RegulusHr kill someone so he can't get second chance like some other accounts? WTF if going on? My reports are still unhandled and one of accounts mentioned in previous post is free to spam: ~ nice!  ~ really good!   I mean, what the fuck? |
|
|
|
~
Nedavno je bilo nešto na tu temu u Slobodnoj Dalmaciji: Stoga smo predložili da se uz zabranu pristupa iz Hrvatske do svih javnih IP adresa ilegalnih priređivača, on zabrani za desktop, mobile internet te nativne mobilne aplikacije. Uz to, potrebno je istovremeno: zapriječiti (ilegalno) oglašavanje, onemogućiti financijske transakcije, odnosno isplate dobitaka igračima koji su ih ostvarili igrom kod nelegalnih priređivača i slično – naglašava Ana Jazić, Sad mi nije jasno na koji način oni zovu neki strani kasino "ilegalan" ili da li se to "ilegalno" odnosi na sve strane kasine, no, uglavnom, imat ćeš tu jako puno stvari za dokazati, recimo - od kud ti novac za "par uplata po 100K kuna" pa onda ćeš morati dokazati te dobitke od 5 milijuna, pa bi mogao i kaznu dobiti što si kockao u stranom kasinu itd. a vjerovatno ćeš u samom startu imati problem sa isplatom, danas ti je manje više sve KYC i provjere, pogotovo za tako velike iznose. Uglavnom, kako btcltcdigger kaže, uzmi odvjetnika. |
|
|
|
@OP I don't think administration will change their decision. There are 2 c/p posts and possible more, but hey, he got away with it, unlike some other accounts doing the same c/p thingy I would urge administration to limit nullius's walls of text due to his time consuming baseless threads and rants which he uses to shit everywhere around. I even find his posts less intresting each day, at least less intresting than bonesjonesreturns.
At least you are maintaining some humor, hacker.  I doubt that too many are motivated to go through any detailed compare / contrast regarding what/who is "interesting" Hacker actually wants to say that nullius's posting style is much different than his: "good project. team is great. innovative technology. invest monez here" "I agree, team is great. they are good. it will help situation in world" "world needs help, that is why I support this project." "me too" "me too" "me too" |
|
|
|
You are saying there that for him to demonstrate or prove you have control of zorobek account then he needs video evidence? I will not quote that entire thing here because it off topic but that is the discussion I am talking about. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127540.msg50571141#msg50571141But the posts above are relevant. Tell me what you mean if you are not saying video evidence is a requirement of account control? Or just in your case? No, no no. You said I asked for video evidence that zorrobek is my alt account. This post proofs that I didn't ask for evidence that zorrobek is my alt account, it shows proof that I asked QS to provide me proof that I deleted post. As I said, I let you play for...."weeks" I hope you can provide the video evidence that you said was the only evidence you malboroza would accept when quickseller stated that was your alt?
Are you denying that when quickseller accused you of being zorrobeck that you asked him if he had video evidence?
Maybe you are saying people only need video evidence to prove your alt.
"alt accounts" to "controlling account", that is pretty much changing the story on your end. Stop changing subject, provide proofs from topic! Lauda==nullius is what you claim, either edit topic so we could discuss other relevant things from topic or provide proofs to back up you claim! |
|
|
|
I will delete all of malborozas posts until he can admit he made a baseless accusation.
When he admits it we can discuss further.
I admit that I made baseless accusation because I messed up with dates, it wasn't for months, it was weeks. I am really sorry for that  A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. Only nullius the scammer supporter can post here
It looks like you're breaking your own rule by posting here. FTFY. Nullius this alt of lauda
Any proofs to back up this statement? A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave. You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations. ~
Lol you are crazy: I hope you can provide the video evidence that you said was the only evidence you malboroza would accept when quickseller stated that was your alt?
quotation please!
Any proofs for topic yet? This account is censoring me now. This account is censoring me now and doesn't want to talk about things from topic AKA nullius==lauda. |
|
|
|
Admit you made a baseless accusation then I will provide the post where you claim video evidence is required for demonstration of control of account.
You are changing your story now, original story was: Are you denying that when quickseller accused you of being zorrobeck that you asked him if he had video evidence?
Lol. I got you there, didn't I? I just let you to act dumb. For months weeks! That's priceless!
Can you please stick to topic and post proofs of "nullius alt of lauda"? If you can't provide evidence, edit topic and remove that part and then we shall maybe discuss other things from topic. |
|
|
|
~
Ok, so no proofs. Are you denying that when quickseller accused you of being zorrobeck that you asked him if he had video evidence?
Can you quote me my post where is said that I asked him video evidence of alt account? I ask the questions here. You answer mine first. Ok, so no proofs and no quotation. Can you please stay on topic? If you want discuss about "video", create new topic for that. Lets just stick to first accusation "Nullius this alt of lauda" and please provide evidence for this. I know you want me to break forum rules and go off topic but I just can't do that. Please stay on topic and provide evidence of "lauda and nullius are alt accounts" |
|
|
|
~
Ok, so no proofs. Are you denying that when quickseller accused you of being zorrobeck that you asked him if he had video evidence?
Can you quote me my post where I said that I want video evidence of alt account? |
|
|
|
Nullius this alt of lauda
Any proofs to back up this statement? ~ So no proof? As I have said there is nň proof Ok, so baseless accusation. 1. The word or being there means there is no such accusation there in that quote.Do you understand this ? 2. Do you or the others have video evidence to back up your prior claims of a person being an alt? Or have you been making lots of baseless accusations? 1) so no proofs, so baseless accusation. 2) can you please show me proof where I said that you need video evidence of someone being alt account? Looks like another baseless accusation.
You've been running around meta and reputation for months weeks accusing me that I said that "you need video evidence for alt accounts", please quote me post where I specifically said that. Or maybe I said something else? Maybe it was a joke? You are pretty much dumb, you know... |
|
|
|
I am not sure is it a good sign, I only changed color of that feedback Sorry, it's my bad. I thought that changing your feedback was important, I thought you were ready to forgive them but nonetheless, a neutral trust is more comfortable than a negative trust  If they maintain everything stable in the future, I think forgiveness can be granted, right? They have chosen a harder way with their old account instead of using a new account It was adviser who claimed he was not part of team, but judging that screenshot in scam accusation he was familiar with project. Betnomi said they agreed on price with him, but when ICO started, they claim advisor start extorting them for bigger price. I have no clue what is truth and it is better to have something documented rather than nothing, besides, I don't trust ICO advisers at all. I thought you were ready to forgive them It is not about forgiving someone something, if something is "going on" I believe it has to be documented. This is not court of judge, it is internet forum, so there was something, it is documented and that's pretty much it, neutral can be just neutral comment, soft negative or soft positive, what is important here is to read feedback and reference and make your own conclusion I have no clue why OP of that topic edited topic nor why betnomi didn't respond to scam accusation... |
|
|
|
Nullius this alt of lauda
Any proofs to back up this statement? ~ So no proof? As I have said there is nň proof Ok, so baseless accusation. |
|
|
|
Jedino što se može desiti je da ona Lucija pokupi ban ako bude dodatnih prijava protiv nje.
Drago mi je da je Lauda promjenila stav kad piše da je Regulus više doprinjeo forumu i bio bolji član od tog hackera koji se spominje.
Bro, nema nikakve logike, navedeno je oko 10 slučajeva gdje su accounti "pošteđeni", ima tu od "bounty hunter" multi accounta, "ico bump servica", manipulacije po default trustu, onog jednog "pravog" plagiarista koji je ukrao nečiji rad i onda tagao čovjeka kojem je ukrao rad (account je završio par puta kao default trust member btw), a vjerujem da bi se našlo još primjera, a pogotovo taj "bump service", pa oni su doslovno plaćeni da spamaju forum i krše pravila, a koliko je to plaćeno shillanje za ICO-e jedna najobičnija prevarantska šema da ne spominjem, I mean, what the fuck? Prilično me smetaju neke stvari ovdje. |
|
|
|
(that's sarcasm, you fucks)
You wish. Timelord2067 will use this as a red trust reference, and I'm sure TECSHARE will find ways to be a humorless prick about it too. Nutildah placed disclamer so no red trust, but he might get another neutral feedback because of off topic parts, something like this: "Reference: bitcoin forum -> Nutildah can't stay on topic (archive, web archive, archive of web archive)" |
|
|
|
Nullius this alt of lauda
Any proofs to back up this statement? ~ So no proof? |
|
|
|
Flags without a relevant reference post are automatically invalid.
That really does not work. I can make a post giving out your name, address, social security number, etc. Basically full dox. You create a flag against me. (As you should) I then delete or edit the post. If it has not been quoted somplace or archived someplace then you are saying your flag is invalid. No. You create topic and you place all relevant information in it. Then you create flag and link that topic. It is actually bad example because you can't archive investigation board. Anyway, create topic and place everything you can in it, it is the same as reference links to -ve, only little more "work". |
|
|
|
Only nullius the scammer supporter can post here
It looks like you're breaking your own rule by posting here. FTFY! Nullius this alt of lauda
Any proofs to back up this statement? |
|
|
|
In addition, marlboroza has also changed his feedback to be neutral, which is a good sign for betnomi.
I am not sure is it a good sign, I only changed color of that feedback |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
