You're not going on my ignore list, and it's good of you to admit selfishness--which really surprised me, seeing how you're not exactly going under-merited.  There are many members who've made as many posts as you have who are still at Jr. Member (or even Newbie). 

You got that right.  The only reason I didn't merit your post is that I'm saving sMerits for the lower-ranked members and you're headed to Legendary as soon as you get the activity.  That's if I can find posts by said members and IF they're not plagiarized. 

Well, you got the expression on my cat-figure right when I'm trying to merit posts in the Bitcoin Discussion section, for instance, or when I'm reading ban appeal threads or posts by cryptohunter--but IRL I look more like the Vod cat, except probably bigger.  You're missing the big Baphomet pendant, however. 

Monday's the day when DT1 is changing?  I'll be very interested to see what happens, i.e., how much chaos and drama will ensue and who will be included and/or excluded. 

Not an insignificant part of me is giggling with glee that you're back on DT for this exact reason.  I never believed those excuses before either, but I did make a couple mistakes in tagging people based on data that users like mdayonliner (I think) and others had presented, like that airdropped dust of ETH (I think) that people got a while back that seemingly linked accounts but was nothing more than someone sending out dust.

Get ready for more threads about you if you aren't already--but I suspect you're more than ready for that.  And I mean more than the ones that popped up a few days ago when the new DT list got released.  Wheeee!

Obviously you're somewhat new here, because this little snippet of a chart is nothing for bitcoin.  Looks to me like someone is selling it in big blocks, but there aren't many buyers overall (or something to that effect, because I'm not a TA guys).  And as far as the drop goes, it really isn't that much.  Bitcoin has been at $3200 recently and has kind of just been bouncing around lately instead of latching on to a trend--though the trend is more or less down since the ATH in '17.

Hoping for the best in 2019, but as always I'll keep my expectations very low.

So there's like a mecha-Godzilla-cat Lauda as well?  Nice, you can take the title from me cleanly--it's all yours, and I never thought I'd held such a thing until around last week anyway. 

I've become a little bit more reluctant to tag the old "alt accounts scamming bounties" members, but have at 'em if you like.  It's not like the number of scammers has decreased any in the past year or so. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5088527

Do I have to scream "pleeeeeeaaaase!!" like that girl in the well in Silence of the Lambs?  Take the pledge, feed the pigeons and the bunny rabbits instead.  And no, I haven't read any posts of his but cannot help seeing the grayed-out thread title and all of your responses.

Edit:
The girl in the well also screamed "Get me outta here, this guy's crazy!!".  And hell no he's not coming off ignore.  You'd been gone for a few days I think, and I only made that thread after a couple of days of his rambling.  I'm all out of troll food.

Don't know about whether Lauda's feedback on you is appropriate or not (it was early on in the merit system), but nullius's feedback on you is a fucking masterpiece.

Can someone quote this post for me:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1303982.msg18558622#msg18558622 ?
It's in a locked thread and I've forgotten how to quote those posts.  That pretty much proves this member isn't the original owner of an account from 2013.

The dadaas account is obviously sold or hacked, and I'm going to tag it.  Over a 1 year gap in posting between March 5th, 2016 to April 12th, 2017.  Old posts were in the Croatian board a lot, now they're not.  Posts were always shit, but after the gap they started sounding like the typical bounty shitposts.  

Don't know about the scam, but the tag will be for account buying/hacking.

Edit:  Thank you, suchmoon.  I'm going to have to figure out how to do that one of these days.

That make me laugh out loud.

So is all this merit going to a single person here or a team?  I don't know if I've gotten involved enough in the big dramas, but I'd be willing to kick in 25-30 sMerits as well, divided equally among a gaggle of geese if they're amusing enough and look like they put some effort into it. 

Explain to me what happened there?  I'm assuming he trusts someone who gave me a neg but don't know who.  I'm not even sure how to check BB's trust list without modifying my own.  Yep, ignorance at its finest and I've been here long enough that I should know this.

Edit:
Yeah, it's my fragile ego that's doing the wondering here.  

Good idea, he's pruned from my list.

Anyone got a "well that escalated quickly" meme or something?

QS has some points, but I'd rather we all just wait to see how this all works out, because I don't think the DT1 list we have now is going to stay static for long, so a month or a few down the road you never know who might be on it. 

Most of that 'clique' are people who tag scammers and so forth, and I agree that just because you sold or bought an account doesn't make you evil.  It's just very damaging to the forum because of the potential for using the account's reputation in order to scam or the rank in order to spam to earn more money, or for merit abuse.  I'd much prefer that account sales were banned here so I wouldn't feel the need to tag them. 

For some reason, that stirred something deep inside me.  Also made me laugh.  I'm conflicted about these feelings now, so thanks for that.

I can't stand your attitude, but from looking at the reference link what you're saying does seem to be true.  I say it seems to be true, because--yet again showing my ineptitude about tech stuff--I can't confidently judge whether what you were writing was true, a lie, or ignorance on your part.  I do think it was too harsh to give you a neg for just writing something crypto-related, which is what happened if I'm not mistaken.

It's between you and Lauda, though, unless some other DT member wants to leave a counter-positive.  As I said earlier, I'm not a big fan of doing that, and you're approaching this in a very bad manner regardless of whether the feedback was appropriate or not.  I'm not saying you have to be an ass-kisser, but aggressively slamming someone and incessantly ranting isn't likely to change Lauda's mind, or Theymos's, or anyone else's.  Just my 2 cents.

Lauda and I both removed feedback recently on a member.  Don't know why Lauda did it, but the reason I did was because I felt I'd made an error after viewing the reason with a new perspective that a few weeks gave me--and it didn't hurt that the member didn't come at me cursing and screaming.  He made his argument calmly and rationally for about the 3rd time via PM and I reconsidered my position.  What you're doing is just making things worse for yourself, because you're coming off almost as unstable as cryptohunter is lately.

Edit: Just checked your feedback.  You really did make it worse for yourself.

If anyone's wondering why a lot of ICO whitepapers seem to be plagiarized (I've seen a lot of scam accusations to that effect), it's because of stuff like this guy is doing.

You're not a victim here, so there's no need to play that role.  Reading forum rules is your warning, and I don't know about common sense, but it's an ethical issue that comes into play when you claim someone else's work as your own.  It isn't right to do so, and there's a rule against it here. 

I hate to bring this up again, but the PM that the banned user gets really ought to contain at least one example of the plagiarism offense so they don't waste people's time playing ignorant and/or demanding proof.  I get that there would likely be threads begging for mercy, but at least there would be no reason for the banned member to ask why he got banned.  Theymos, if you're out there please heed my cry.  It really isn't a bad idea IMO.  Whether it could be implemented simply and in such a way that it's convenient for mods is outside my realm of expertise, but I think it should be done.

I did answer.  You excluded me in February 2018.  When did the aTriz stuff come to light?  What was your original reason for justifying excluding me from your trust list?  It certainly wasn't that.  You're making up reasons after the fact.

Yeah, OK.  You excluded me from your trust list when?  It was on or before 2/10/18, because that's when I got booted off DT2 the first time I was on it.  Can't remember if it was you or Tomatocage's exclusion that did it. 

When did the aTriz scam get discovered?  Oh yeah, it was around April:


So aTriz had nothing to do with it.  It's not about me abusing newbies and discouraging their progress on the forum as you first claimed.  It's about Lauda and nothing else, and you were never honest about that. 

And you excluded me from your trust list because of what, again?  I think your stated reason was that I was picking on newbies or something like that, something completely unrelated to ever scamming anyone.  I've never had any beef with you except for that, which caused me to be booted from DT2 the first time I got added.  I think we disagree over Quickseller's 'self-escrow' thing, but the real reason I'm pretty sure is that you think I'm on the wrong side of the OgNasty/Lauda squabble.  It's more of a feud, actually, and I want no part of it.  

I have a feeling you'll get back on DT again anyway.  I'd almost be willing to bet money on it (but I'm currently broke).

A'ight, fair enough.  I had to respond to Og's post, though.

He excluded me from his trust list some months ago, and I don't even know the guy--much like zazarb.  Somehow I had a suspicion that the account might be compromised and I think it was discussed at one point.  In any case, don't count on me to do him any favors.

Hilariousandco:  Definitely yes.  I've already got him on my list.
SaltySpitoon:  Yes.  I don't know him at all, but I've read some of his recent posts and seems very level-headed and cogent.  An old-timer who used to be on DT1 who has no history of scamming?  That's a no-brainer.

The rest of them I'm not all that familiar with, except BadBear just by reputation and he's on my list as well.

That was my impression as well.

In a recent thread, I asked about whether adding Jet Cash to my trust list was a good idea or not, but after just reviewing it it looks like I already had him in there.  If anyone has any concerns about that, feel free to let me know but I think he deserves it.

Edit:
Yeah, and me as well if I'm not mistaken.  I was on DT for something like 3 weeks then got excluded by either OgNasty or Tomatocage, but it was the latter that had me a bit puzzled.  He hadn't even been active for a while before coming out of the woodwork to exclude me from his trust list and apparently you and the above members as well, though I don't recall that.  I found that not just a little strange, but very strange.

OK, please explain to me like a 5-year old how VINSIN is linked to the above images.  Am I missing his name somewhere?  It's not that I don't believe you necessarily, just that I'm not seeing the link with him and what you posted as evidence.

Edit:
Whah?  You're saying a forum member scammed you, but there's no proof you've shown that it's actually VINSIN.  You have to actually show proof here for anyone to believe you--not just YOU, but anyone making an accusation.  If you don't do that, the accused member isn't going to get a neg, although I'd already tagged VINSIN for dealing in accounts.  Turn the paranoia down a few ticks, eh?  I've got nothing to do with this other than being a skeptic.

More negative trust to him just gives him more fuel for his fire--trolling is what the ignore button is for.  Everyone still keeps feeding him, which is why he's still posting like a madman.  A lot of the attacks are personal, but I'd probably go with the ignore button and thick-skin approach, especially if you're on DT.  I think pretty much everyone realizes what he's writing is lunatic fringe stuff, so I wouldn't bother with the red trust.  Neutral is more appropriate if anything needs to be said on his trust wall, IMO.

Check my feedback and you'll see I've done multiple PayPal deals where the other party sent either PP or btc first.  Check with gameristo, to whom I owe a bitcoin debt to and am paying back promptly every week from the Chipmixer campaign.  I'm not a prolific deal-doer here by any means, but I have done documented transactions where I certainly could have either done a chargeback on PP or not sent bitcoin.  I didn't come here to scam anyone, have never used DT status as leverage for anything, and don't ever intend to do any of that.  But I get it, that's what every scammer would say, right?

You might think my inclusion on DT1 now is overdone (and I'd probably agree with you there), but if you're really saying that you don't trust me, that's another matter and to that I would say to look through the positive feedbacks I've received from trusted and untrusted members.  You'll find some evidence of honesty in there somewhere, I kid you not.

Now that would be something for the bitcointalk history books.