All this brings me back to is the overwhelming consensus the forum were in regarding the Livecoin campaign that I was managing.
There was one user with one complaint labeling it as a scam and it seemed to only be fit that I would no longer manage such a campaign - I tried to find a solution to the issues but after no success I was more or less forced to end it.
Now I won't draw any parallels here since these are two different cases with two different issues but it does baffle me somewhat that nobody is taking a similar position as they did with the Livecoin debacle.
You tell me how I can tag Yahoo without causing massive retaliation even though in this case an tag is more than appropriate[1][2], or tagging a massive partitioning in the DT system (i.e. chaos) and I will. This situation has shown two things: - The DT system is selectively hypocritical (as outlined by you in your argument). Actually, I'm certain that Yobit is by far a worse scam than Livecoin is and that if we assessed the metrics this would be objectively proven true.
- Almost nothing can be done against highly entrenched DT1 members that are financially motivated, especially if there are also other notable members on the payroll (merit source, DT2, other).
As a consequence of this, we have shown complete disregard for all the victims and have pushed the boundary to some scamming behavior is okay because someone's opinion is that it's actually not a scam. Beyond disgusting what money is capable of invoking in humanity.
[1] Actually the appropriate proportionate action is to get tagged by several DT members. Not because he was part of it, but because he failed/refused to act based on nothing other than financial motivations while third parties spent tens of hours debating and looking into the case. |
|
|
|
If someone thinks mixers exist to launder money for scammers he's righteous to red tag people wearing their signatures.
If you don't see a difference between something that exists with the sole purpose of scamming (X10/investbox) and something that may be used by scammers (mixing) then there is no limit to absurdity you can push this argument to. I actually can't believe that we are still having this discussion. It's not like you could argue that there's no mens rea or anything..  |
|
|
|
|
I think that if this continues, anyone whose financially-motivated opinion is/was that "Yobit isn't a scam" will need to be tagged. By continuing this path, you are not proving that you a free-thinkers or rational - Quite the contrary, you're proving that you are very easily manipulated, and your opinion can be bought for pocket change. Whether you want to admit this to yourself or not is not of my concern (or any other rational member's opinion).
The nonsensical "whataboutism" drawing to mixers and the advertising of gambling services (hello me) deserve even more condemning than the people above. You do not get to justify advertising a scam just because somebody may be advertising something else, or some other type of scam (even if it is a bigger scam than the scam that you're advertising!).
|
|
|
|
I'm really sorry.
Every day, I began to walk away from this forum, which I fell in love with because of unfair accusations and slander.
I really don't understand why they're doing this.
I have always enjoyed being a part of this forum.I've seen everybody blame each other lately .this is painful.
Stop abusing the forum and you won't be "unfairly accused". |
|
|
|
For me, I'm not a fan of the current feedback system since there is a reason why, for example, Facebook, Twitter, etc., don't have a dislike button.
Just because 99% of the humanity can't be trusted to rationally assess other people's behavior, that doesn't mean that nobody can. People who use Facebook & co. are very ignorant and sheep to begin with.
Answer to OP: More than necessary, restraint is more often exercised than not. |
|
|
|
|
I hope that we never hear of or see Yobit again, utter and disgusting display of humanity's evil.
|
|
|
|
This is probably the most well-intended post in this thread.
Stands like this can easily result in account destruction.
-snip-
I will retreat now for my own good.
That was the whole point of PM-ing users! It was for their own good, certainly not the good of the sender or people spending their time advocating for this. I would leave no ratings on you (assuming you didn't retaliate against anyone which I didn't look into). Thank you, it makes doing good much easier! |
|
|
|
*has sent a PM
That's all I wanted to post.
This sort of self righteous bullying all over the forum needs to stop.
Wrong. I was advised to take a uniform approach (before the existence of this thread and me knowing the user list) and tag everyone instantly after sending out the PM, i.e. not even be generous as Jolly was with the 24 hours. People who removed their signatures would have their tag removed, those that didn't were implicitly acknolwedging awareness of the situation and admitting they condone advertising for scams (thus their own actions or well inaction makes them inherently untrustworthy and worthy of the tag).
iluvbitcoins please stop arguing the advertising a ponzi scam (i.e. helping people get scammed) is sensible or otherwise you'll find yourself on autopilot to self-destruction of your own account. You can thank me later. Legally, you're probably right though. Google has been earning money having phishing sites advertise on their search results for many years, and reporting the ads doesn't mean they get removed so it's intentional.
How about we don't waste time what a broken justice system thinks should imprison regular citizen and not the lawmaker, and actually focus on the distinction between good and evil whereas Yobit is a pure display of of the latter? |
|
|
|
This rating on nullius is a lie, and combined with the OP you are way out of line. You're out of line for a normal member, let alone a DT1 member. Vispilio 2020-01-24 Reference Trying to silence dissenting opinions in the forum by conducting financially damaging black propaganda operations.
The pure vitriol and bile in most of this "plague"-infested obvious alt account's msgs should remind admin of a master criminal he personally blacklisted from the Trust system about a year ago...
2run 2020-01-24 Türk forumuna katkılarından dolayı kendisinden çok şey öğrendim. benim için Türk forumunda güvenilebilir bir kaç üyeden birisi.
dannybrown 2020-01-24 Yardımsever,dürüst ve oldukça aktif bir üye.Kendisine güveniyorum.
gospodin 2020-01-24 Scam savaşçısı. Dt sistemini üyelere tanıtan, blockchain ve kripto para ile ilgili local bölümdeki insanlara güzel bilgiler sunan insan evladı.
These users will need to be considered, and also likely need to be tagged & excluded for evident abuse and nepotism. |
|
|
|
This rating on nullius is a lie, and combined with the OP you are way out of line. You're out of line for a normal member, let alone a DT1 member. Vispilio 2020-01-24 Reference Trying to silence dissenting opinions in the forum by conducting financially damaging black propaganda operations.
The pure vitriol and bile in most of this "plague"-infested obvious alt account's msgs should remind admin of a master criminal he personally blacklisted from the Trust system about a year ago...
|
|
|
|
|
I'll be joining you on this. Please bump the thread when you initiate.
|
|
|
|
Yobit runs fake ICO's.
Yobit runs fake IEO's.
Yobit operates ponzi's.
Yobit operates fake tokens.
Yobit operates fake coins.
Yobit openly steals from customers.
Etc, etc....you all get my drift.
Some members of this forum: "But where is the scam??". 
A countless number of opportunities are being given to just stop, without consequences even! I'm beyond disappointed at this point. |
|
|
|
This thread is very damning..
How much scam is enough scam to do something about in in a widespread and consistent manner?
This is what bothers me with this. If this continues, i.e. we do not do anything in said manner, then this will set a precedence that some scamming is acceptable which is very dangerous, and frankly just unbelievable. There is definite logic in that approach. After they were given permission to return to the forum they probably would have got banned within days anyway but I think I read there was wide consensus for yahoo62278 to handle things just for the sake of cleaning up the forum from spammers but with hindsight maybe it was not a good idea for the community to ask him to contain the Yobit campaign.
We need to keep a clear separation of the problem: 1) Yobit spamming - administration issue. 2) Yobit scamming and people advertising a known scam - trust/DT issue.
The current state of affairs is a display of complete failure on our end regarding point 2. After reading you post I will say there is still a lot of merit in the approach I applied to the process of scams being promoted: In simple terms, if a user promotes a scam but does not believe or accept it is a scam, then it is up to the community to present evidence to show them they are wrong.
If however a user openly states he knows he is promoting a scam and then fault blames victims for getting scammed then that clearly shows the user is unsuitable for any responsible role... but without a shadow of doubt I think you make a very valid point indeed Lauda and you have articulated it in such a simple manner, so much so it makes it difficult to argue against it. Thank you. I believe that the following soft approach is the most correct to everyone and can't be denied in that way: Extending on what you said - If there is consensus within the majority of DT that this needs to stop, then I'd issue a mass PM to every single person wearing their Signature and would point out: - Evidences and cases of their scams.
- The consensus of the community that advertising any scams is unacceptable, or particularly in this case that advertising Yobit is unacceptable.
Any sane, user who does not condone scamming would then voluntarily remove their signature. For those that do not, well they will have implicitly (if they do not respond but show activity post receiving the PM) or explicitly (respond but refuse) acknowledged that they are aware of the scam and are still willing to advertise it. This would make the case of tagging them very trivial.
Please keep in mind that the action that I'm talking about can only be done once we have some sort of, majority of active-DT consensus. No member, regardless of status, can attest that this is unfair treatment/biased/etc. This very proposal goes completely against my own nature, the one that people are used to. |
|
|
|
Here's the list. Please note that I did a case insensitive search for "yobit" in all profiles that have posted in the last week. This means that someone with for instance "Fork yobit, they're forking scammers" in his signature is included too:
Thank you. I'll work under the assumption that less than 10% of the users have Yobit in their signature but are not actively advertising Yobit. Wow. I didn't realize that it was this bad, forking hell. |
|
|
|
This thread is very damning..
How much scam is enough scam to do something about in in a widespread and consistent manner?
This is what bothers me with this. If this continues, i.e. we do not do anything in said manner, then this will set a precedence that some scamming is acceptable which is very dangerous, and frankly just unbelievable. There is definite logic in that approach. After they were given permission to return to the forum they probably would have got banned within days anyway but I think I read there was wide consensus for yahoo62278 to handle things just for the sake of cleaning up the forum from spammers but with hindsight maybe it was not a good idea for the community to ask him to contain the Yobit campaign.
We need to keep a clear separation of the problem: 1) Yobit spamming - administration issue. 2) Yobit scamming and people advertising a known scam - trust/DT issue.
The current state of affairs is a display of complete failure on our end regarding point 2. |
|
|
|
I have removed their previous negative while I look into the current state of events (which are unrelated to why the negative was given). Do note that I was being threatened with a flag[1] unless I comply, not that this was the reason for complying.
[1] I don't see how someone has a "right to give a flag" if I don't comply with a rating review in time.
Publicized PM because cases are on-going and I don't want to keep this in my box.
Actually they are confusing flag with trust rating. By giving flag, they surely meant giving red trust if red trust for not paying campaign participants isn't removed. I don't see how someone has a "right to give a negative rating" if I don't comply with a rating review in time. There you go, same answer applies. |
|
|
|
If Yobit is banned from the forum then I will tag every and any user showing the banner after the ban is enforced but any user displaying the banner would probably get banned quick-time anyway.
If Yobit is banned as in sig. banned, then they won't be able to wear them anyway (theymos stripped all the signatures last time for 60 days). And we are likely going to end up with "we're letting this one slide" until we have a "Yobit 2.0" case. |
|
|
|
I have removed their previous negative while I look into the current state of events (which are unrelated to why the negative was given). Do note that I was being threatened with a flag[1] unless I comply, not that this was the reason for complying. The participants of the advertising campaign received their payouts, buy you havent removed your red flag and are spoiling our reputation on the forum for no good reason. And you ignore the fact that we do pay the participants. We think this is wrong. Unfortunately, if you do not remove your flag, we will have to use the trust system to announce your unethical behavior.
Kind regards,
Best_Change
If you're threatening me into taking quick action, or "else consequences", then you may forget about correcting your reputation. I will publicize these PMs. The only thing that I can tell you at this time: I'll look into the case when I have time, there are more urgent matters on this forum. This is not a threat but informing you in advance. We have a right to give a flag to users spreading misinformation about us despite provided proof of no wrongdoing, but as a gesture of good will we decided to inform you in advance. We do not mind if you wish to publicize these PMs we would have done it ourselves, but the topic where this situation was discusses is unfortunately locked. We would really appreciate the speedy resolution of the issue. Cheers, Best_Change
[1] I don't see how someone has a "right to give a flag" if I don't comply with a rating review in time. Publicized PM because cases are on-going and I don't want to keep this in my box. |
|
|
|
In my country, people who advertising gambling services is also punished by law. Not only in my - in USA, in EU and many other.
This is not true. I will not compensate you anything. The same if you'll jump from a roof i will not go to prison because of that. Even if i advertised this house or a roof. Because you have your brain and i doubt that you have certificate from hospital that you're ill and not responsible for your actions.
Quoted for reference. I will now go invest in this legitimate company and when I become rich (and I will very soon given the very juicy returns), I will share it with everyone who advertises it. If I get scammed, I will hold you and anyone else advertising Yobit accountable.
The more responses I get and the more that I read, the case to tag everyone as opposed to singular cases (as I previously quoted eddie) grows stronger. P.S: Here we go again. While anyone Yobit promoters silently making their money, i'm argue with Yobit haters and as in russian "Бyдy кaк вceгдa кpaйним". At least, increasing my english skills  You are Russian? |
|
|
|
I'm not getting scammed while using Yobit exchanger. Why anyone another should? I mean if you prove that my signature which i'm wearing now - is scam (or at least with high probability) i'll remove it. But if you tried to give me narrative like "Yobit - scam" when you should better try, because i'm using it and don't have any problems with it. Yep, i'm not investing in "investbox" or something another shit. But i don't see any reason why anyone another should do that. Or at least forced to do that. here is my topic about real scam - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219339.msg53659941#msg53659941You can notice that it's enough different. User was fooled, ToS was edited (to cover malicious actions), feedbacks were deleted and money were stolen. I don't see such kind of actions from Yobit. I would call it like "use it carefully using your brain". The same example with your signature - noone is forced to use gambling, but without brain anyone will obvious lost all his money. There is not any chance to "win" in long distance. Despite some idiots telling another. So mu view is clear: Invest box is scam, but Yobit itself it's not. It's the same as gambling. If you have conscience to advertise gambling, when i will advertise Yobit. The money that you are getting has completely made you biased beyond repair. Do you think that people who advertise ponzis do not get punished by law? You are knowingly enabling and promoting them, and by doing so are increasing the user base of potential victims of their scam product. Whether you yourself got directly scammed or not is irrelevant. This is one of the most pathetic displays of "trustworthy members" in these numbers in the recent years on this forum.
What would happen if I went and used the investbox now and got scammed? Will you protect Yobit again, under what pretenses? That I knowingly went to get scammed? That you're only advertising a different product of a scamming entity so it's alright? Will you compensate me for my money? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
