Is because i am change to post in english thread so i am accused bought this account?
Nope, but that's part of the evidence. Its true that i am change my password but its because my security. Someone trying my enter my account. I can not give a prove to you about this but is it a my fault if i am change my password?
I never even mentioned anything about a password change, but explain to me how someone "tried" to gain access to your account, and how you somehow thwarted that attempt by changing your password. That just doesn't make sense to me. And about gap posting, i am forget what i do between 5 days but its clearly not more than a year or months.
Uh, I showed in the OP where the enormous gap was, and it was more than 5 days: Then there's a huge gap, and when the account resumes posting on December 1, 2017 it is on the Indonesian local board with this: semuanya masih menanti bro  btw yang gajian duluan malahan peserta bounty telegram ni yah He continues to post in Indonesian up until March 26, 2018, and after a gap of a few days he starts writing in English again on April 7, 2018--only this time, the quality of English has turned from eloquent into something that should look familiar to those of us who fight against shitposting: From my opinion, there is something positive from that policy. That policy can avoid from criminal action like money laundrying and for goverment, that policy can prevent from massive outflow capital.
And no, your defense is weak and doesn't clear up anything. It only exposes you as a liar as well as an account buyer or a hacker. Sir, i am Indonesian and i can not sure you my english is good but because my english grammar mistake, i am breaking the rules?
This has nothing to do with the quality of your English or your nationality. It has to do with account buying/hacking. |
|
|
|
It's bad that that section has been infested with spammers.
Yeah, but it's not surprising that it is a haven for shitposters. All you have to do is write a few words about where you think bitcoin is headed, and the post will basically be on-topic even if it is garbage. Although I tend to think technical analysis is a bunch of voodoo garbage, there are some members in that section who are hardcore TA enthusiasts, and they do put some work into their posts and some members do find that useful. I've posted in Speculation quite a few times, usually when the price is moving and I'm getting excited about it--but mostly it's the same threads and posts repeated over and over, and it's not one of my favorite sections. Jet Cash, I know you're trying to help the newbies, but they're allowed to read and post in sections other than B&H and if a thread about price movements seems more appropriate for Speculation, then that's where it should be. I've had B&H on ignore for a long time, so I don't even know what they discuss there. I would think questions about basic crypto stuff would be the norm and not market speculation. It was already suggested that maybe you could request a mod to keep your thread in the B&H section as a favor to you, and that might work if you feel strongly about it--I don't see what the big deal with that would be, since you're aiming to help the beginners. That's up to the mods, obviously. And as jackg suggested you could make a self-moderated thread, but chances are that if it's in the Speculation section no one will reply there and it'll get buried in no time. So why do we have a beginners board?
Why do we have a speculation section? It's just people pretending to know where bitcoin is going or people writing nonsense posts for their sig campaigns. Edit: the bitcoin price cannot be tracked properly but bitcoin does not dead because bubble!!! buy low sell high except now bear season so wait until the price is going good again
- probably some post in Speculation
Lol, exactly. And funny you mentioned the "buy low, sell high" thing, because that's what most of the posts there boil down to. In fact, that's true of some other sections as well. |
|
|
|
Or just showing the two first lines followed by a "view more" button.
Sometimes, it is useful to leave a long feedback .
Agreed. That would solve the problem of long spam feedbacks like OP quoted without reducing the freedom to leave a long feedback when necessary. Why should idiot trust spammers get to take away the ability to write what needs to be written, regardless of how long it is? In addition, a trust spammer would be less inclined to write a repeating wall of spam if they knew it wasn't going to show up exactly the way they wrote it on someone's trust page. |
|
|
|
>Be wrong.
>Deflect.
>Try and be funny.
>Win?
Exactly. The fact is that you aren't on DT because you chase after scammers and hand out tags by the hundreds. It's for precisely the reason TECSHARE thinks someone ought to be on DT--deals you've done and the ability to be trusted with money. Anger and jealousy, that's all this is. |
|
|
|
Merit already is hard to earned. For every 100 newbies, maybe only 5 can rank up.
You're either a complete idiot or an alt account, and I'm 90% sure it's the latter. *Edit: could also be both* In any case, the above quote is probably correct and that's the way it's supposed to be, since only 5% or so of newbies aren't bounty spammers. If you're somehow not an alt account, you may not be familiar with why the merit system was created in the first place. I'll leave it to you to search through Meta to find the answer to that--but since you can't write English properly, you probably can't read it well either and wouldn't be able to distinguish a good post from a shitpost. I'm puzzled as to OP's gripe. He claims to have gotten scammed by VINSIN, and even though VINSIN was extensively tagged by DT members, OP is blaming DT members....because VINSIN's other victims (not sure who they are) didn't tag him? And thus the trust system is so broken that OP is joining the moron brigade in order to overthrow the default trust system? Have I interpreted this correctly? Makes zero sense. |
|
|
|
Because as a knee jerk cheerleader for these people, I see you as no different. Is that not how you scambusters do it? Guilt via association? The point remains regardless of the fact it applies more closely to people you support, such as by making this post to begin with.
In other words, you didn't even check Hhampuz's trust history before you accused him of mass tagging people, and you're covering up that error by blaming everyone else for the whole "guilty by association" thing. Gotcha. |
|
|
|
|
The post quality has changed since 2011, at least to my eyes. Not that his English was perfect back then, but it seems to have been much better than what he's been writing lately.
It's also a bit weird that an old-timer would suddenly inject himself into the middle of all of this forum drama after all this time, especially given those periods of inactivity. Being inactive sort of makes me think he wouldn't care so much about the DT issues and whatnot...and then suddenly he appears.
I never noticed this thread, apparently--or I didn't pay attention to it when it was created. Now I'm really curious as to whether it's the original owner posting. Not sure how he can prove it if he can't sign a message. PMs and e-mail are kind of iffy forms of proof, but I'll keep my eye on this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
I know I'm late to the discussion, but I think a physical comic book would be fantastic and would be extremely collectible--especially if there were only a small number of them printed.
People have shifted away from "floppies" as far as reading comics goes, but as far as I can see there's always going to be a market for them. With bitcoin still being just 10 years old, a physical comic book could be worth a lot down the road. Look at those bitcoin magazines that were published a few years ago. If I'm not mistaken, they're going for well over what they originally sold for and it's only been about 4-5 years since they came out.
Anyway, good luck with your project. It's always nice to see some passion combined with initiative and creativity within the bitcoin community. If I had any money to spare, I would help out--but as usual, I'm flat broke.
|
|
|
|
Thanks, yea that's what I'm aiming at right now, in case of any trouble.
I'd like to add that I highly doubt anyone is going to tag you just because you made a thread self-moderated. At least not anyone whose trust carries any weight. Also, there's now a notice at the top of all self-moderated threads that tells everyone how many posts have been deleted, so if you started deleting a whole bunch of them then someone may start to wonder if there was a problem. Otherwise, you could quote the post, defend yourself if it's an accusation against you, and then delete the post. Or you could just delete it. Or you could make a local rule against specific members posting in your thread. I agree with your position about not wanting to self-moderate a moneymaking guide thread, since it's best to keep everything out in the open...but there's not much else in the way of defending yourself against people telling lies about you. |
|
|
|
These trolls currently spamming Meta and Reputation don't have 250 merit between them, let alone on one account, doubly let alone on two accounts.
And that's exactly why they're whining about it, claiming it's unfair and blah blah blah. Meanwhile, I'm more concerned about finding decent posts (especially from lower-ranked members) to give merits to. Every time I take the plunge and visit Bitcoin Discussion looking for hidden gems I end up finding plagiarism or bought accounts instead. This concerns me far more than this petty power struggle with the army of newbie trolls. The only thing they're capable of doing is making a lot of noise and making fools out of themselves. I keep hearing about how merits get circulated amongst the DT members. Can anyone show me how I'm a part of that? It's true I've given merits to some of them, but most of my earned merits didn't come from members like Lauda, LoyceV, Vod, or any of them. Most of the sMerits I've given out haven't been to DT1 members. I think in general this is an argument that's been debunked, and yet it keeps surfacing. It was meant for the Market place...Not for spammers and Account buyers or for anything else.
Funny, that's the argument TECSHARE keeps making--likely because if it were true he'd be back on DT, since he has done a lot of successful trades. The truth is that this trust system isn't set up like eBay's and never was about just the marketplace. I won't argue that the system is broken or that successful trades and being able to trust someone with money ought to be rewarded with positive trust. At the same time, some individuals who can be trusted with money might themselves abuse the trust system (TECSHARE) and thus might not be fit to be on DT. True story. Edit: Yeah, and look at the total number of merits I've given to and received from the DT members. They represent a small fraction of the merits I've earned and the ones I've given out. Sorry I peeped at your post, but obviously you're trying to make it look like I give most of my sMerits to DT members and get most of my earned merits from them. That isn't true by a long shot, kiddo. |
|
|
|
right, you got the easy way before the rule changes right?
What easy way did I get? I was tagging account sellers and scammers well before I got on DT2. I was airdropped 1000 merits when the system was implemented, but I earned the rest fair and square. The way I see it, we both started as complete newbies and I chose a different path than you. I didn't try to buy my way into a higher rank, I didn't try to buy trust, and I didn't buy merits. You're just lazy and resentful that you got caught. The problem isn't with the system; it's with you. |
|
|
|
The ignore button is great, and my ignore list is huge. I can't even keep up with all the shitposters that should be put on ignore--they just keep coming and coming, like annoying enemies that keep respawning endlessly in old NES games. Another forum feature that the latest batch of trolls has discovered is the self-moderated thread. I would advise most DT members or anyone who doesn't agree with the anti-DT trolls to avoid threads like this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988.0, because of stuff like this: (26 posts by 9 users with 5 merit deleted.)Obviously they've found a little bit of power and intend to use it to the fullest to censor anyone who disagrees with them. And yes, I've made self-moderated threads but I give a lot of leeway to members and basically don't want the same old trolling and shitposting in my threads. Disagreements are fine, but zero-value posts and rants that I've read 100 times already are not. With these guys and their threads, it's not worth the effort to even post in them, since there's a high chance your post will get deleted. It's certainly their right to self-mod as they see fit, but I think they're just doing it to screw with DT members and the Meta regulars. Edit: As an example of what gets deleted from that thread, here's an excellent post by HCP that I gave merit to: Quote from: gwsukabokepjepang on January 30, 2019, 09:16:40 PM
give a good reason why my real customer feedback showing untrusted?
And your feedback showing as trusted? you did not even done any transactions with him.
or are you just defending this forum even though i have got a point? Because there is no actual way of proving that you even conducted a trade... if ALL ratings were automatically set as trusted, a scammer could simply create 10s or 100s of fake accounts and leave themselves 10s or 100s of "positive" trust ratings, artificially increasing their trust rating. And you think this would be a better system? Huh
The whole point of DT members tagging "dodgy" users is to try and help newbies by raising a red flag about the trustworthiness of a user. It does not mean the user is a scammer necessarily... it simply means that someone on the "Default Trust" list thinks that person is untrustworthy. Hopefully, it would encourage newbies to investigate and do their due diligence before trading/conducting business with a tagged account.
Current reasons that some DT members hand out red trust:
- User committed a scam
- User was spamming
- User was promoting a scam
- User was using an alt account to do something untrustworthy (merit abuse, trust abuse, campaign abuse etc)
- User asked for non-collateral loan
- User bought/sold (or tried to buy/sell) an account
With regards to this last reason, some, but not all, DT members regard this as untrustworthy... because historically, a large percentage of "bought" accounts have been used to scam or spam or both. Buying/selling accounts is not against the rules per se... but some DT members will tag bought/sold accounts as they do not consider them trustworthy. Generally, they will include a reference and a note to indicate that the account was bought/sold.
Imagine you have a "Legendary" account with green trust... suddenly pops up on the Loan section looking for a 1 BTC loan. Potential Lender checks their history, sees they have a history of positive comments and trades from 2 years ago... thinks "yeah, looks legit".
Now imagine that account was bought yesterday by some random guy who found out about Bitcointalk last week... do you think it is fair that that account has "positive" green trust? Huh Did the current "owner" actually earn all that trust? Huh Update on that thread: (33 posts by 14 users with 11 merit deleted.) |
|
|
|
because merit system is unfair also.
some are real and some are fake,
i can guarantee if it keeps on like this, this forum alexa ranking will drop below 50k soon!
<snip>
I think the trust system really needs to be moderated!
Instead of conforming to the forum's rules and standards, you're whining about it like a child and expecting the rules (and the forum) to accomodate you. No one is forcing you to be here, and bitcointalk isn't some work-from-home employment service. You'll get no respect here for trying to take the easy path to owning a higher-ranked account, and your opinions on how things work here only reflect your ignorance. If you don't like it here, leave. It's that simple. Bitcointalk isn't going to bend to your will just because you got scammed and negged for trying to buy an account. |
|
|
|
I will surely PM them, let's see what they will say.
Good. By the way, this thread shouldn't be in Serious Discussion. Either Scam Accusations or more likely Reputation would be better choices. I'm pretty sure you can move it to one of those section yourself (I've never had to do it before, so I'm not entirely certain), though I did report it to the mods asking them to do it. |
|
|
|
Non of these are strong evidence that there were misuse. Anyone can send merit to anyone. There should be no complaints. Only exceptions are the merit sources.
The evidence does seem to suggest that these are alt accounts, and if more than one is in the same bounty it amounts to cheating. That would also mean that the merit system is being misused if it's just one person behind the accounts, but that in itself doesn't make the accounts tag-worthy. I'm not inclined to tag them, but maybe another DT member might feel differently. What I'd like is for those members being accused to come here and tell their side of the story. OP, maybe send them a PM linking to this thread. I have a feeling I know what they'll say, but you never know. This same situation has popped up quite a few times, and their defense is usually the same (not surprisingly). |
|
|
|
i don't know why he want to scam $42?
to get more red trust?
He probably needs to buy more booze. Not joking. On the other hand, I don't see solid proof that he actually scammed anyone here. If my memory serves me correctly, this is the second thread I've seen claiming VINSIN scammed someone without actually proving it. And if it was actually VINSIN who scammed OP, luckily it wasn't for that much. Some people have to pay for a much more expensive education before they learn to 1) check feedback, and 2) use escrow. Edit: Ah, OP was trying to buy an account it seems. Well, that's what you get. |
|
|
|
I often wonder why some DT members are never part of these endless rows, could it be because their ratings are seen as fair?
Which level of DT are we talking about here? DT1? It gets confusing these days. Some DT1 members don't jump into the drama because they likely know it's a never-ending fight and it's more or less just wasted energy to keep engaging in the troll wars. Even if their ratings are fair (or more fair than others), the people on the other side of the fence will never see them as such, because it's just a battle for power and no one is prepared to give up an inch of ground. This whole situation is just silly. Theymos set the criteria for getting onto DT1. I didn't fight to get on it. Lauda wasn't even on DT2 at the time, nor was TMAN and some of the others. As far as the trust lists and "votes" DT1 members have cast, I'm not seeing where this grand conspiracy is coming from--maybe because I'm not in the loop, but who knows. But those who are yelling the loudest about how unfair it all is (cryptohunter, Thule, etc.) will never stand a chance of getting on to even DT2. All they do is whine and scream, while the rest of the upstanding DT1/2 members are actually trying to fix some of the problems bitcointalk has, i.e., finding scammers, account dealers, and all the other stuff that landed them on DT in the first place. |
|
|
|
A red mark on a internet forum is life changing? get a grip
Easy for you to say. Then you end up on DT, giving out red trust and start getting PMs like this: I have two children, should I finance
I will not repeat it
I beg your remove my trust for negative. I will not repeat it
I have no work other than in the forums
I am sorry
Thank you
hello sir, I'm sorry if my post is not good, but I think I will improve the quality of my post and I hope to remove redtrust in my account. because I created a very long account and this account for my work and support my family because my child is still small. so I hope redtrust in my account can be removed. thanks sir  ....and so on. Sure, these people could be totally lying but I don't doubt for a second that in some cases a red trust means a great deal when the consequence is that they get kicked out of whatever campaign they're in. |
|
|
|
Even people on the Default Trust group get off on having power over others.
Theymos may not be like this but just saying it is a possibility.
This is a bit off-topic, but that "DT power" is something that tends to get very exaggerated in the minds of those who aren't on DT. If I don't agree with someone--or they lay into me with a barrage of insults or what have you--I can't just leave them a neg for doing that, which is why I haven't tagged trolls like cryptohunter, digaran, and all the other ones who've attacked me. If they've done something untrustworthy on top of that, then tagging them is definitely indicated. Other than that, it's more of a responsibility than some intoxicating feeling of power, and ultimately all the power means is that a DT member's feedback carries more weight than a non-DT member's. I never got the impression that Theymos was a power-tripper. He mostly stays silent and lets the forum work things out on its own, and he only makes small (but sometimes significant) changes here and there. That certainly doesn't meet my mental picture of what a power hungry person looks like. If that were the case, I'd expect to see a lot more censorship and more of his presence at the very least. |
|
|
|
Forum earn more than enough money by selling ad slots and any kind of donations are not really needed. They also have hugenumber of Bitcoins in reserves.
And if Theymos himself says that the forum isn't in need of any more funds, there's no way I'm going to donate. As much as I'm grateful for bitcointalk being here, there's no use giving someone else your money when they don't need it and you've got no idea how it would be spent anyway. As far as the copper membership goes, it's a good tollgate for members who want to begin signature campaigns as soon as they join bitcointalk and that's about it, though having some of the other restrictions lifted definitely makes life easier here. If you're above Newbie rank, I'm not sure why you'd buy one. I don't see it as any sort of status symbol, just proof that you're willing to throw money away on a title that doesn't give you any benefits you don't already have. Quickseller was one of the first non-noobs I'd noticed who'd bought a copper membership, and to this day I have no idea why he did that. I think moderators who get paid for helping keep this place clean would disagree with that statement. It is quite an achievement what was built here and theymos using advertiser funds to help make this community better well into the future doesn't seem like greed to me.
I was under the impression that mods didn't make much money for their efforts. I've never heard anyone mention the pay rate (nor do I expect to, as it's none of my business), but in any case I don't think it's a huge expense for the forum. Correct me if I'm wrong. Edit: I didn't say moderators were a huge expense to the forum. I said they get paid and that they don't think theymos is greedy. The latter is an assumption on my part, but I believe it is an accurate one.
I wasn't disagreeing with you; I don't think Theymos is greedy either. I'm actually curious as to how much mods get paid, but I don't expect anyone to answer that, nor am I even asking the question. I've always suspected it wasn't much and probably got that notion from something someone wrote a long time ago. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
