I don't doubt it. He has little self control.

I like where you are going with this, but IMO there are more legally compliant ways of doing this. For example, if you organized a tax deductible nonprofit to promote cryptocurrency education, then you could each year donate the maximum allowed deductible amount to this nonprofit, and get others to do the same. This would help grow the cryptocoin economy while also removing as much money as legally possible from the hands of those that waste it, with little to no representation being offered to you in return.

IMO, Wikileaks is, and always has been a honeypot. Most people don't know just before Assange created Wikileaks, he was busted for hacking. Magically he didn't do any time. I wonder why

BTW: I am firmly anti TPP, or any agreement which removes national sovereignty in exchange for maritime law.

No, but making up stories about people based on zero evidence is. I should add he resides in Canada, which follows similar defamation and libel laws to the UK, which are extremely broadly enforced. When you start attacking nonprofits trying to become tax deductible charities, you start to attract lawyers working probono looking to make a name for themselves in the public eye.

What you said is technically correct, however most new users of Bitcoin gravitate or are directed here in order to learn new information, ask questions, and get involved with the community. Bitcoin would live on if this forum was gone tomorrow, but the fact is it still represents Bitcoin for better or worse. There is such an atmosphere of abuse here that is so rampant it often turns the benevolent skepticism of new users into active rejection of the entire idea of Bitcoin, because unlike veteran users, they don't know that difference.


The primary factor in people getting scammed is THEIR OWN LACKADAISICAL ATTITUDE. People like Vod help foster that attitude by giving the impression that the community stops scammers. In reality a fool and his money will ALWAYS be parted, no matter if it is Bitcoin, cash, credit, or anything else. In stead of teaching awareness and skills to prevent being scammed, the community is hyper-focused on outing scammers, which in reality does little to them but delay their scams, and provide entertainment for rubberneckers.

Vod by no means stops scammers, he simply delays them by forcing them to start over. The fact is the scammers WILL NEVER STOP, and believing otherwise is naive. The question is, is it worth it to tear down and drive away lots of honest users in this inquisition on suspected scammers that will never stop? This is not just a Bitcoin problem, it is a global problem, and the scammers are unfortunately winning. Lets not sap our resources even further flailing aimlessly about damaging contributing members of the community over an endless war that can never be won.

Next thing you know Vod will be harassing little girls running lemon-aid stands, demanding their health inspection paperwork and their business license.

I am sad to see him living too. This thread is also very sad and transparent. Vod is just making this post (like last time) to feed his ego so he can read the list of people kissing his ass and reenforcing his belief that no matter how many people he abuses he is invaluable to this community, thereby reinforcing his behavior. He did this a few months previous. He is not going anywhere. His obsessive compulsive personality will prevent that. His primary reason for doing this besides inflating his ego is so that he can lay low for a little while and escape the backlash from his abusive behavior, and so he doesn't overstay his welcome with the more influential people in this community.

He will just take up another identity but will quickly be spotted again because his behavior is very abusive, and he can't help himself. I got a message today from a company attempting to raise funds to become tax exempt status (including copies of their filing paperwork), and he is harassing them over the technicalities of their filing. Now he is messing with people ACTUALLY trying to create charities.

He is doing far more damage than he ever prevented stopping scammers. This is the kind of stuff that drives good people away from Bitcoin forever. Any scammers he "stops", however will be right back again within minutes setting up another scam. Vod is running his own little version of the drug war here on the forum, only the war is on scammers, and he doesn't care how many good people suffer in order for him to "win" this war that in reality will never end.

Your attempt to draw me into your personal battles has failed. I have already said everything I needed to say about QS.

Did you try logging in with your old password and then just resetting it that way? This way no email confirmation is required. Also check your spam box.

This OP reminds me of the last time he took a break from this forum.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=921710.0;all

Who wants to bet he is back within 3 months with a new name, but the same old act? I am not sure he understands the difference between laying low and taking accountability for his actions. The fact that he has to modify his behavior in any way is equally offensive to him, so it seems to be the same thing from his perspective.

Lame. I enjoyed his additions to the debates int he Politics & Society section. I guess that is the curse that us old timers will have to bear as the years pass :/

I noticed that Vod had previously left me a positive trust rating agreeing with me about the trust system (most likely out of spite of Badbear informing him he would be excluding him if he did not remove his rating). Now after the perceived slight quoted above, suddenly it is gone. I think he is having issues trying to figure out whom he should spite more (in stead of perhaps examining his own behavior).

This is the primary cause of most of these disputes in my opinion. There are no official rules for how to use the trust system anywhere on the site. I understand the idea of wanting people to define what is and is not acceptable for themselves, but at the same time if there are no limits at all defined then there is total confusion and subjective application of these unspoken and unwritten rules. Under this system no one is ever sure if they are abusing the trust or not. In addition this means often users will be punished overly harshly in some cases, and in others clear abuse will be ignored. The way it operates now these "rules" are 100% subjective and open to selective enforcement.

If the buyer and seller are so inclined, I can offer escrow for a 1% fee. I have traded with Inglewood personally before several times and everything was above board. Your suspicions about the hack are justified, but easily remedied.

I consider silver to be a better store of value than gold if you are going to buy a precious metal. The reason I say this, in spite of silver's additional volatility, is that there are MASSIVE secret stores of gold all over the earth, meaning they can more easily drop the price by flooding the market.

Gold is not consumed very often in industry compared to silver, so more and more of it is in supply over time. Silver on the other hand is literally even more rare than gold (above ground and available for consumption), and it is an irreplaceable component in many modern electronics, which ultimately end up in land fills, removing it from the supply. Due to the constant inductive force of the industrial uses of silver, it is more difficult and less likely for large hidden stockpiles to be able to flood the market.

I like how you revised the definition of Atheism so that it appeared to support your argument. Should I just call you Webster from now on since you are writing the dictionary for us? BTW that is another ad hominem attack (an actual fallacy).

You have not produced empirical evidence to demonstrate God does not exist, therefore your conclusions are based upon faith in the unknown, just like any other religion.



Speaking of lies, you have previously claimed "Athesim is still based on evidences". Please produce it. Additionally when you assume, you make an ass out of u. Now we are measuring the power of religion by the number of them rather than their influence over the population? If I invent 10,000 religions tonight do they count?

I am not "looking only at communist/dictatorships of which the power is entitled to a very limited few".

You made a claim that

"Atheism is not. Controlling the population" and  

"you cannot say,"Any time a government has tried to remove that foundation, it has demonstrated to have catastrophic consequences. ", because you're giving a effect without a cause. There hasn't been any sufficient amount of governments, if any besides the current communist ones, in history that have done such a thing. Please stop creating logical fallacies."

You admit that some of the current communist countries fit this description, yet at the same time deny that such a state ever existed. Then when I produce an example of such a state you claim I am focusing only on those states, produce red herring arguments about polytheism (another actual fallacy), and take the liberty to redefine dictionary definitions to fit your arguments. I am not giving effect without cause. I explained the cause. The government seeks to displace the role of religion UNDER THE GUISE of secular rule. It has all of the same hallmarks and exploitable weaknesses of religion, it is just in different wrapping paper. This adds even ANOTHER layer of deception and confusion, in addition to stripping the law of the benefits described above.

"Stalin's government had all the trappings of religion, including Orwell's totalitarian theocracy, and thus it's merely a play on words to say that it was not religious."

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4076



I am not selectively choosing anything. You admit that some of the current communist countries fit this description, yet at the same time deny that such a state ever existed. Then when I produce an example of such a state you claim I am focusing only on those states. Then you proceed to just summarily exclude the communist states because some how they don't count. Who is cherry picking here me or you? I don't think you are sure any more. BTW, that was, yet again, another ad hominem attack (an actual fallacy).

Glad you got it sorted. That could have been a big mess.

He was likely banned by a global moderator until Theymos could give it personal attention, just as a security measure.

Lol. I had noticed that as well. I seem to be a topic killer.

I see you you still can't restrain yourself. There is no hypocrisy, just no understanding of the rules that were unwritten and never explained to me at the time. He was impeding my ability to trade directly. He had the rest of the entire forum to accuse me of scams if he wanted to. The only reason he chose to do it in my op was to entertain himself at the expense of my sales. This is a common problem in the marketplace section, and often staff refuse to do anything about it. It is like trying to sell things on 4chan here some times. Anyways, do you have any comment on the actual topic, or are you just here to start more drama because you were asked to revise your rating left for me?