Yeah, it should start any day now and that's the very least that I can do. |
|
|
|
-snip-
have been charging project owners ridiculous amounts of money to list their IEOs because they cite the fake data on CMC as the reason/proof.
This is a non-reason. They can charge whatever they want, and you might want to look into most current top 20 exchanges if that is a reason for you. Thread context for other accusations: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5205331.0.
I don't know who that Ukrainian person is. |
|
|
|
We plan to create a topic in which we will analyze each complaint individually. To ultimately resolve all current misunderstandings.
We will not launch asignature campaign without escrow. Waiting for your reply No, there is nothing you can say that would change the opinions that users have formed on p2pb2b and its sister scam coinbitI'm about to accept escrowing their campaign pending elaborations on a few more cases. This is therefore, untrue. I hope that they can amend their issues rather than condemning them for trying to. |
|
|
|
Anyway back to the topic, even with the cloud flare thing, his case is way different than the ICOEthics.
Yes. I've actually wondered about this myself a couple of weeks ago and remain clueless about it to day. |
|
|
|
With nullius the things were a bit more different. At one point I thought it was theymos' alt which was just for fun account only to escape the high position he has and have a free chit-chat. He ended up disappointed after the "love romance" he HD with alia before "she" was revealed as a previously well known scammer favours. So nullis ended up disappointed and just quit. This is wrong, why are you writing stuff like that? nullius left because of spyflare aka Cloudflare a known NSA honeypot. Many users are refusing to join because of this reason. Well, sorry if that the real reason, but I thought it was because of alia, they had a lof of fun together and after "she" was disclosed he looked disappointed, short after he just disspeard. He's a much greater person than 99.9% of the people of this forum are, and something like that is not going to do too much damage to him.  |
|
|
|
And don't start with the bullshit of a great poster being able to post all over the forum LOL. Or being able to make 100+ posts per week without negative effects on quality.
Even 2 accounts is an undesirable outcome practically for everyone. Who'd want me (or anyone else for that matter) to post several thousand posts per week over tens of accounts? Businesses? Users? Nobody. |
|
|
|
For what purpose? What is this naive question? This question is intended as a question for you. I do not know your thoughts in their entirety and this is merely an act of communication: no ulterior motive. I just want to make sure I understand your whole argument rather than create an accidental strawman. Quite unfortunate. Are you going to fight those who attack users that enrol several accounts in campaigns actively? Sure: after all, as of the time writing this post, I still see no logical precursor for this rule. If there are no such users, keep the rule. I don't follow. The situation you are creating is one where the rule is implemented either directly via a genuine rule or indirectly via retaliation from other users. All I am asking is if you, and people who are supporting this, are going to defend the people who are going to use it and get attacked for using it. Simple as that. Like I said, this is trivial; I could fill probably half of all decent BTC running campaign without blinking. Is such a case a desired outcome? At least with a rule, there's a deterrent in the form of punishment (you'd get kicked out and likely neg. rated afterwards ruining your accounts). It is equally trivial to prevent your accounts from being linked. Again, I fail to see the practicality of the rule -- I might understand the rationale once you indicate the negatives of an individual's account list encompassing a significant portion of the signature campaign. Given the amount of people that got caught "trivially preventing account-linking", this argument does not stand. |
|
|
|
For what purpose?
What is this naive question? Use your head and base off of past instances of this occurring (campaign related or not). And in this instance, if the user is found out, this is irrespective of whether the rule is implemented or not. Any retaliation against the activity would be that of a community action. In this case, I would rather know the public alternate account linkages between identities rather than create an incentive for people who do in secret.
Are you going to fight those who attack users that enrol several accounts in campaigns actively? If there are no such users, keep the rule. Like I said, this is trivial; I could fill probably half of all decent BTC running campaign without blinking. Is such a case a desired outcome? At least with a rule, there's a deterrent in the form of punishment (you'd get kicked out and likely neg. rated afterwards ruining your accounts). or willing to support left leaning ideas supported by the ‘mob’ in order to keep his income (such as DireWolfM14),
Cute little wanker you are.  |
|
|
|
What is the pragmatic difference of using the rule vs. not using the rule? I don't see one.
The forum is broken either way, so no difference to you nor me really. Until theymos is replaced, you can ignore most rules and dance around like CH & trolls do. I have nothing against your suggestion, other than the increasing visibility of forum staff mostly being worthless. single user could handle whole campaigns that way. Interesting, but why could this not happen right now? Because an army of imbeciles would attack the user once found out. Even if this rule were to be dropped, in special cases (e.g. me) you'd have an infinite number of threads and posts bashing the user. |
|
|
|
Are you saying that if I joined with 10 alt accounts, that QS & co. wouldn't troll the fuck out of the forum?  Quality posts are trivial unless you're a baboon like the supermajority of the forum; single user could handle whole campaigns that way. |
|
|
|
With nullius the things were a bit more different. At one point I thought it was theymos' alt which was just for fun account only to escape the high position he has and have a free chit-chat. He ended up disappointed after the "love romance" he HD with alia before "she" was revealed as a previously well known scammer favours. So nullis ended up disappointed and just quit. This is wrong, why are you writing stuff like that? nullius left because of spyflare aka Cloudflare a known NSA honeypot. Many users are refusing to join because of this reason. |
|
|
|
<snip>
you deserve a ban.
Not yet. First escrow the fund and put a signed message. I could offer escrowing it, but no way I'm holding the money that long and not this user's money. He's undesirable. I have plenty of BTC & if I lose the 0.05 BTC bet then I will pay up (I won’t lose though). Pretty sure I’ve showed micgoossens evidence of how much I have. 0.05 BTC is a drop in the ocean. I will be ready to receive my winnings when we reach a new ATH before 2022 Peace. Edit - send it here when we see the new ath in most likely 2021, Bossian - 1KQ2ZvnRGezVHosYrWx27ftGMPNVR6KKKw Very easy win excluding any major sudden events. |
|
|
|
How about you fuck off cunt? Why did you even join a Bitcoin forum in the first place? Maybe the problem is you, and not everybody else. Maybe.
Hello Lauda, Joining this place provided some edges to me and my personal investments, internet communities are not perfect, I was just trying to contribute for a better place. That's all  It seems many got offended by my topic, sorry for that, it was not intention. What thread? This thread?
FYI, with the creation of this thread in meta and this purposely trolling thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5205835.msg53222617#msg53222617, you deserve a ban. |
|
|
|
|
How about you fuck off cunt? Why did you even join a Bitcoin forum in the first place? Maybe the problem is you, and not everybody else. Maybe.
|
|
|
|
Tell me which exchange does not engage in fake volumes, or are you that naive?
Binance. You're a funny and naive one indeed. No worries, you'll learn how the real world works soon enough.
Seems they have updated the thread and handled accusations 7 though 10. |
|
|
|
By looking at the accusations against your exchange, I think it would hardly take you some years to solve this all or probably never.
Just a good luck from me for your fake fight !
The same can be said for pretty much any exchange; don't let your bias cloud your judgement and let them try to resolve their issues rather than attacking them for trying. I am glad they are trying to address the issue here rather than rebirthing again with another project. But they are engaged in showing fake volumes of cryptos on there exchange which is simply not common for any decent exchange. Tell me which exchange does not engage in fake volumes, or are you that naive? |
|
|
|
|
Doesn't this project have its own Telegram group?
|
|
|
|
I only trust the Binance exchange because the trading volume here is quite good and looks more real than the other exchanges.
 Go away you shitposting baboon and let adults handle this. |
|
|
|
My analysts and the underlying facts speak for themselves.
There are no facts (presented by you), and you (nor your accompanying scam buddies) are certainly not qualified to perform any objective analysis. The only fact is as follows: No funds have been lost, and more funds have been returned than was required. I'm a lurker on here, no main. I just thought I'd investigate it myself with the tools I have.
It resolved itself, unless you want me to cast a couple of spells. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
