You have 2 hours to provide evidence of the false allegations, and trolling, you have apparently found contained within our above posts. If not ,I delete your post as garbage.

Examples of deleted posts we disagree with. Reasons provided. It would seem responding to false accusations, or questioning unsubstantiated claims with a challenge, or pointing out observable double standards is not permitted flow.


1.  Trust explanation in trust settings for improved forum peace

The following post contains smarmacists usual net negative shit post: containing false accusations, that he has been called on many times but failed to present any examples, therefore he is trolling again.

=============================================================================



=====================================================================================


The post that is deleted here simply makes a rebuttal to pharmacists false accusations, a sensible suggestion that WOULD increase forum peace, and a sensible  statement regarding pharmacists general net negative shit posts (he has been challenged many times to present some of his original thought inspiring posts and he can not present even 1,) The repeated trolling claims from him have been debunked many times previously. We did not even mention that he again is whining on about trolling when he was caught red handed being a sneaky greedy racist trolling sig spammer under a sock puppet  HugeBlackWoman (which again would highlight his double standards net negative shit posts)



2. Another sensible challenge to a claim lacking evidence , on a thread about earning money on the forum by posting and other means.

=====================================================================================

=====================================================================================

Another sensible reply deleted. The cryptomanurebrainlessboss is claiming that if you review LFC BTC posts it will be impossible to miss the excellent merit worthy contributions. He is pretty much claiming if you just present worthless junk like LFC BTC you will soon be getting merits, and earning like him. I am asking him to present one example of an excellent post LFC BTC has made. He can not find one obviously?


3. A thread where the  Mod Hilarious and co is defending his actions against MDO.



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5135175.msg50736638#msg50736638

MDO makes several claims that Hilarious  and co is treating him in a different way to which he treats other members, we believe this claim does have some clear grounding.


=================================================================================
Quotes below from MDO

"I need to understand forum moderation policy. Is it specific for individuals?"

"Not sure how many more users are victim of your bullshits and master manipulation"

"I have issues with this dipshit hilariousetc aka global mod hilariousandco. To me he is nothing but a blatant liar, a master manipulator who is using his influence in the forum."



Quotes from hilarious and co.

"There isn't any. Master manipulation is laughable. What have I manipulated exactly and for what gain? What do I get from exposing you? Are you saying liars, scammers and merit abusers shouldn't be outed? "

"There's a slither of doubt because there's no concrete evidence only circumstantial, but as you said I strongly believe them to be the same based on the evidence we've already been through. There's too many coincidences and quirks though. If this was taken to court then a jury probably wouldn't convict based on not enough concrete evidence, but that doesn't mean that there's no guilt, just not enough to convict. Plenty of people get away with crimes because of this. Everyone knows OJ killed his wife but that wasn't found to be in a court of law"

"I wouldn't say malicious but the ponzi promoting to me is an issue and I would question the lengths he will go to make money. Had he received money from the escrow he may have immediately vanished. Or he may have performed his escrow duties as hoped but I would have been very surprised if that happened, but I guess we'll never know."

=================================================================================


Our sensible on topic and highly relevant reply that demonstrates clearly that MDO does have reason to question and highlight hilarious and co "DIFFERENT" approach to his "friends" behaviors of lying, scamming, and other things that likely meet the OJ threshold of guilt that he mentions.

==============================================================================

MDO is claiming you seem to be treating him unfairly. I would say that he does have a compelling case. I will explain.

I say this because you clearly seem far more "worried" about the lengths he would go to to earn money based on supporting some ponzi. This you claim is an issue for you.

However, it is observable that you seem far LESS worried about other members who have observably lied to dupe investors for financial gain (scamming), they have abused trust to silence members discussing their pasts, they have been implicated in SERIOUS extortion schemes? and yet you are not only NOT worried about them?? You actually feel that you should support them on DT1 and vouch for them?  So either he has a clear case or you are very very confused about the types of people you should worry about and have issue with?

How about explaining this to the board so we can understand your reasoning here? I personally could care less if MDO has red or leaves the board. However, double standards from persons in positions of trust are concerning. You should take a stand AGAINST observable scammers and liars and trust abusers and yet you seem to take THEIR side against honest members.

=================================================================================


4. SEE BELOW

We are against red trust (that sticks) being given for anything other than scamming or strongly intending to scam. Anything after that is a slippery slope. Account sales (when discovered) should perhaps be given a different tag " this account is not under the control of the original owner". This is sensible as it can be leveraged to gain trust.

Sorry, yes, the tweak was just allowing a temp red trust whilst further examination is conducted in the case of hacked accounts etc before they are locked down.

Our main concern is free speech, then the protection of innocent members from false charges and punishment, saving the greedy and stupid from themselves should be a lower concern. Still all that can be done to save them should be done without negatively impacting on the first two.

Universally adhered to standards and guidelines. No double standards which breed contempt and loathing of the corruption freely observable in the systems now.

We believe you had a similar discussion with cryptohunter on his thread of the year. We notice you do not accept the systems of control have any impact upon free speech. We do not think we can reach much common ground until you take another look at that part.

Decentralizing anything successfully in terms of governance is very complex, compounded by the anonymous nature of this forum,and far beyond the scope of 99.99% of this board to design. Far more concern should be given to preserving free speech than to prevent some spammers and low level scammers. One member that probably could have taken a good shot at it is sadly banned for a non scamming related issue.


Sensible guidelines for red trust that are at least under threat of being enforced should be enough to discourage flagrant abuse. Those that do continue must be blacklisted.  Merit has its own powerful influence on free speech, it is the carrot to DT's stick. Putting those 2 together was ridiculous, as cryptohunter correctly recognized and stated before theymos for an unknown reason tied them together. He essentially seemed to create a system that is as easy as possible for a few members to collude and take total and complete control of free speech. Very strange.

I had previously thought that the long game may improve things. It will but not much. MAD between the main controlling factions will ensure fair treatment for them by other factions. But the general member with no connections and no WMD's will be as vulnerable as ever and far more likely to run fowl of one of the corrupt and selfish DT members as that number swells and pickings become slimmer at the top.

Scrap merit after snr and decouple it from trust. Provide clear guidelines for red trust and ensure they are universally upheld or blacklisting will start taking place, a couple of persons made examples of will get them in line. Pushing for merit to represent the real value of a post is likely impossible due to the sheer scale and the fact most peoples abilities to discern real value from specious dirt vary hugely  and always meant merit was doomed to be a very low value metric. To try to build upon it as some kind of objective metric of high value was folly.  Snitchmoon I believe said it best: good post or bad post are meaningless terms without criteria or definition. Merit is not meaningless it just has very low value. It can likely distinguish bot from human but that is probably all. It is misleading and dangerous when you start pairing it with financial value in the form of paid2post rates.

These are in part why the board is struggling to juggle upholding free speech, and stopping spammers and low level scammers. There is likely no magic fix but as it is now is as bad as things can get. When an observable liar and scammer can red trust an honest member because they say they will create a thread to examine their past and the rest of DT condone and sanction it. You know the board is fucked.

When the most disliked member in meta challenges the entire meta board to present one example of incorrect information they have presented and they all  fail to present one instance then you know the board is fucked.

When the most disliked member in meta challenges the entire meta board to present any other clear agenda they have other than to bring some clear transparent rules to ensure the fair and equal treatment of all members, and they can not present anything. You know the board is fucked.

Pretty sad times for BTT. Although historically it is there for public examination, when those people who care to look back at some of the early believers in creating an end to end decentralized trust less arena.

I don't understand your criticism? You believe strong endorsement (huge merit award and comments) by a person who abuses the trust system by his own admission, and supports an observable liar and scammer, and someone that is implicated in a serious extortion scheme is not a negative thing?  How so?
This makes me untrustworthy because I do not wish for those that are possibly strongly affiliated with such persons given more access to influence the systems of merit and trust?

Also, I don't feel your grasp of English is adequate for you to get certain nuanced or subtle points that the poster may be making. You may therefore not be suitable to be accurately applying merit where it is due.

Sorry, but that, with the dreadful posts you selected (regardless of the subsequent excuses) exposes you as an inappropriate merit source. We have enough of those. Let's have some people that can differentiate between net negative nonsense and real value.

Too many dreadful bumps also. Very desperate and pushy looking.
Just my honest opinion. We can discuss it if you wish.

My type? those that tell the truth and ask for idiots like your to back up your nasty allegations with some evidence?

The only thing you need to be ashamed of is your obvious stupidity. Stop appearing so desperate, and ass kissing so hard, for a few merits and some btc crumbs.

Thanks for confirming you are accusing people of being scammers with ZERO evidence, and can not provide any even when called on to provide it.  It is not rocket science to see that you are shrinking away, from providing anything to substantiate your wild accusations and net negative dirt, you spill everywhere spamming your  sig.  

You illustrate the point clearly: that these systems remove all accountability. They are damaging ill conceived junk that allow any fool such as yourself to label a person a scammer when NOBODY can present any case to demonstrate they have scammed or intended to scam anyone, even when challenged. I can present evidence that many DT members are very untrustworthy: some are scammers, liars and probable extortionists? what  do you say about that?

Thanks for illustrating 2 points, the other being that your off topic sig spam that broke my local rules was not deleted because the mods are as corrupt as most of the DT members here. They selectively delete what they feel suits their agenda and fits in with their pals here.

You need to show up and be my assistant more often.
Or will you run away and hide now ?


@actmyname


The low level bogey men here are avoided by all except the most foolish or most greedy. The real bogey men are not something DT have the power to prevent or capacity to identify. Presently some of the mid level bogey men are the DT members.

Some objectivity and accountability will return free speech to the board and ensure scammers can not brand honest members with a scam tag.

The implications you mention, are likely mitigated to a large extent, with a couple of simple tweaks.

Rushing to judgement is at times, potentially useful, but for the judgement to stand, it must be accompanied by a strong case. Those failing to provide after a sensible time frame are removed from DT, if they do not remove the red tag.

Free speech, and protecting the innocent from self enriching scammers and liars, is far more important that a small (if any) % real benefit in saving the greedy or foolish from themselves.

Your word is not worth much though and you operate as a gang. Therefore one of your friends or alts will find a reason to red trust at some point. That is not to mention that the same gang gives out all of the merits (to each other mostly)  so they can kiss goodbye to any rank up etc.

You only need to read the true legends most important thread of the year to understand how it all works and the clear implications.

@yogg

yes, that is WHY it is a suggestion for improvement. That is why the board is a gamed and abused mess. With you and your crew of obseravable liars, scammers and probable extortionist trust abusers contributing to its imminent demise.

Of course you do not want to be accountable for your actions.

@CryptomanureBrainlessboss

Present evidence of the scammers that are complaining ? or is that just your latest ass kissing attempt to get to a higher rank to spam your signature ? 3rd world ass lickers are sickening. I see that cabalism13 is now begging to use his "wifes" account to spam 2 sigs.
Must be terrible to be so desperate for btc crumbs.  If you are going to spam the board with your sig please make sure your post has some tiny value rather than obvious net negative nonsense. Present the evidence to support your claim. Where are the scammers that are complaining? where are their scams? I find it impossible to believe any REAL scammer is going to come to meta to complain about the DT system.

Bring evidence or you must be branded as one who would false accuse others for some merit scraps and to spam your sig. No more pajeets ass kissing with false allegations.

I believe he is a suspect campaign manager. I am waiting to see if he would help push a site like yobit on members here.

I would not use him for any campaigns. I notice he supports the actions of liars and scammers. He also accuses those that highlights those observable instances of wrong doing as trolls.

So would avoid.

I think you need to reconsider tagging nutildah.

read this and then tell me WHY you think he is trustworthy and not deserving of a tag

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134507.msg50719875#msg50719875

Yes, you can milk the board even more by sig spamming with your other account. Financially motivated posters are more than welcome. Before you proceed. Can we ask why you need to be spamming 2 sigs?  If sigs were removed would you even bother to still be a member of the community?  Why not just post with this account?

Cryptohunter VS scammers, liars, trust abusers and their supporters and ass kissers, from where we are watching.

There is no evidence to suggest the pseudo security of NOT having a red tag does not do more harm than just getting rid of the entire system? I wonder the number of successful scams that took place because the person says to himself: hmmm he would have a red tag if he was a bad guy. I'll send him my bitcoins.

I wonder how many HUGE scams were pulled by green trusted users?

These stupid petty scams the DT idiots bust, are only the scams the VERY dumbest and most greedy would fall for. The LARGEST scams are the projects here that produce convincing white papers, with a credible team, that burn through their dev funds, dump all their tokens and have some fake bust up and years later nothing happen but a bunch of newbies and greedy bums lost all their BTC and the dev team unloaded all their expensive tokens and took the dev funds in huge wages.  They then pop up later to start a new project. The billions lost there and the damage to confidence in the entire decentralized trust less dream is magnitudes more than these petty 3rd world thieves DT members think they prevent trying to snipe a couple of btc.

If you want a trust system THE MINIMUM is not allowing person on to it that are observable liars, scammers, extortionists, or guilty of ANY financially related untrustworthy behavior AT ALL, AND give some sensible fucking guidelines and enforce them. You only tag people that scam or you have a STRONG case they are going to scam. How hard is it? people that think they can red tag others who simply present facts about them, or wish to examine their behavior publicly, can be blacklisted, obviously.

BOGUS

I totally agree with the initial poster here. This deleted posts weaponized junk needs to be transparent, with mod who deleted it and reporter and reason for delete. I would advise anyone being targeted with this kind of shit, start reporting all of "the gangs" posts where you have had similar posts deleted in similar contexts. If they are not deleted, pull up threads in meta requesting WHY this is.

The moderation specifically relating to deleted posts is totally bogus here. Mods seem to be FULLY complicit in attempting to get people banned. YES, there is clear double standards of permitted flow.

We reported 9 clearly off topic posts most that broke our local rules, but that were also clearly off topic and mostly were just false accusations and attacks and 0 of them were deleted?

The usual crew here, use this gamed deleted posts metric, as a tool to try to get people banned. SOME mods are complicit. They refuse to delete "their pals" posts that are just personal attacks, that are FALSE, but will delete observable events presented that bring valuable insight to the reader?

The natural permitted flow on this board is again VAGUE to the degree it can be again used as a weapon.
Theymos again does not even bother to take the FULL context of these deletes into consideration. He just reads the number of deleted posts and takes that as some kind of reliable metric? when once again it is observably unfair, manipulated garbage.

For example: you could stumble upon a thread discussing member x trolling and how to get member x banned. You may find you then are suddenly accused of trolling, and people saying you should be banned on that thread ( you are not member x)

If you even question this, and say please present some examples of me trolling, because that is a false accusation, and you present observable instances of this person trolling themselves under a sock puppet account to sig spam for btc crumbs. Then you will get your posts DELETED. They are then able to continue discussing you as if you are a troll and feel no need to provide even one example. So you rack up 3 or 4 deletes from 1 thread and they get 0 even if you report them. Totally bogus.

Or check out the DT thread where theymos announced the ingenious cycled merit based trust system. Suchmoon and many of the gang make personal attacks on that thread that are not related to the OP. They should all be deleted and we noticed many other " out spoken" members got MANY of their posts deleted for exactly the same kind of argument, only they did bring observable instances to substantiate their claims. Go report all of their personal attacking posts on that thread because many other peoples "fighting posts" even if substantiated with evidence because it was derailing?

Even WORSE:  we were watching a particular thread where observable instances were brought to demonstrate the pharmacist had been using racist trolling spamming  and Tman started attacking the true legend cryptohunter with: sexually deviant comments and other false accusations that he would not provide evidence for when called on it. We noticed cryptohunter was replying with ONLY observable instances of Tmans trust abuse (which Tman then admitted in public saying: he can, will, and just has red trusted cryptohunter for presenting observable instances regarding his friend laudas untrustworthy behaviours WTF?? and nobody did anything about it.).  

Cryptohunters posts kept getting deleted, when they were the truth, and only in response to Tman's attacks, yet Tmans posts remained there. Before the thread was FULLY deleted we have read that several cryptohunter posts were deleted before just trashing the entire thread. The same for another thread he was posting on. That got nuked fully. It seems his posts were deleted individually before the thread was nuked to increase his deleted post count? bogus.

Also we notice Cryptohunter had many posts deleted because they were NOT permitted to post according to some local rules. His posts kept getting deleted. We tried some local rules and we notice cryptohunter did also, and none of those breaking the rules got deleted ?? BOGUS

There are several instances where suchmoon was saying "our only hope it to keep reporting all of his posts" presumably to get the true legend banned. So they do openly use this as a weapon.

When Theymos issued a PUBLIC warning of a ban based upon the number of deleted posts cryptohunter had had ..... THEN MYSTERIOUSLY right after that someone scanned his entire post history for 1 word replies and reported around 10-20 of them and they were all deleted within moments of each other. BOGUS  

The entire board is corrupt, and if you speak out, you will be silenced, with either red trust, or they will find a way to ban you.  

The mods here do not even PRETEND to be objective and neutral. They lavish merits on other members who FALSELY accuse other members of trolling and making rubbish posts? even when they are challenged to bring examples and they can NOT. BOGUS

Mods will openly accuse you or posting rubbish. You ask them for 1 example? they can not provide even 1 example to discuss and analyse, they just say if they want to call you posts rubbish they will but will not bring an example and publicly examine it. BOGUS

There needs to be some sensible, transparent guide to permitted flow for many different scenarios. Apparently precedents are not allowed, defending your own name is not allowed, even if you bring observable instances. Well, obviously it is allowed along with everything else if you are a gang member. Try to get some of suchmoons of fox poops or moronbozos random groundless attacks removed?

Nobody here will have any kind of sensible public debate at all over anything. Weak minds, low achieving bottom feeders, that will not even present examples of their original thought inspiring posts for analysis. WHY? because they simple have NOT made any (but do have 100's of merits from each other). These people are mostly idiots. They start arguments with you, then when you squash them in public, and their feeble arguments, they get upset, and want you gone.

You should be able to say ANYTHING so long as it is relevant, it provides insight, or background for the reader, and you can present observable instances, or a strong case to support what it is you are saying.

Your post look no more off topic than many other gang members posts which are NOT deleted.

This is DELETED POSTS junk, another NEW weapon, to silence any members that care to mention inconvenient observable instances " the gang"  want to forget about.

Please do not insult people with your stupid remarks. You are a known trust abuser, and an observable supporter of scammers and liars. If you want me to produce evidence of this request it. This mental illness claim is all they have left when you destroy the rest of their straw men and false accusations in public.

Yahoo trying to help promote a scam site like yobit, just tells you all you need to know about this person. These people have no issue pushing scams on people, and luring people on to sites like yobit, for some extra btc for themselves.

Look at the amount of projects stating yobit are creating their own artificial markets by pulling wallets offline? and keeping them off line for months or years. The site is a SURE way for newbies to get burned. Buy some coins there that you do not realize are off line or just get pulled off line for no reason after you buy. That is the end of your investment or get ready to take a HUGE hair cut. Some of these projects they are running on the OLD chains after there were swaps or hard forks. Totally bogus markets.

We need to start bringing under the spotlight the actions of campaign managers here. They need to present a strong case for not employing a first come first served acceptance. Any person being turned away should demand public analysis or it is untrustworthy discrimination on the basis of observable liars, trust abusers and scammers.  If the campaign manager can NOT provide strong case that you are a scammer or that your posts do not meet the threshold required of other posters then they will be held accountable. The projects hiring managers that are seemingly reserving spots for their "friends" or getting "kick backs" will be called out if they hire them. No more pushing accountability to the "trust" system or any other bogus and gamed metric like merit.

We will push for fair and equal treatment for all members. The selection process should be transparent. The entire model from start to finish is completely open for abuse and gaming.  They want to game this place for their own personal selfish reasons. Hit them where it hurts with their sponsors. No point appealing to other DT or mods they are direct beneficiaries of this abuse. The sponsors reputation is the weak point.  Present only the truth and observable instances and you can not lose. Prove they are allowing observably untrustworthy individuals in on their projects and the project is very vulnerable to criticism. They will not want that. Especially new projects.

The reason to have them removed from meta specifically, was explained previously in the thread that he first suggested it. Perhaps read that thread again. If you find it impossible to locate the specific reason. I will explain it to you.

You failed to present any direct examples of the  "rubbish" unless the observable truth or observable instances clearly demonstrating precisely what we said they demonstrate is " rubbish".

Find a specific example. How hard can it be, if all of our posts are "rubbish"?  I challenge you now to present one instance of incorrect information that we have presented. Come on present the example of "rubbish"?? I mean if you are now saying you term observable instances of lying, scamming, trust abuse, probable extortion is RUBBISH.... then you obviously have no place being a moderator do you?

Bring a SPECIFIC example of the incorrect rubbish we are spreading everywhere? or admit rubbish is just a word you use to cast doubt over observable events demonstrating clear wrong doing by those you include and enable on to DT.

You can not can you? you were simply casting false accusations again and have been called on it. Or your notion of RUBBISH is going to be fun to analyse in public.

Petty beef? you mean like observably lying, scamming, trust abusing, racist trolling sig spamming under puppet accounts for extra BTC crumbs? these kinds of petty beef?  yes, don't take those into account when placing people in positions of trust.

You surely are hilarious. Please get a mental health check yourself.

Would that not leave the rest of this board vulnerable and to scammers and liars like your friends?  How uncaring would those members be if they just left?
Why don't you guys all go to another board. you could call it bigcontalk and perform your human centipede merit and trust behavior there? Biggest scammer takes all?  I will lurk just to enjoy the show.

Hilarious posts are fun. Full of "false" accusations, straw men and in protection of his scamming and lying friends he enables on to DT. A totally unbiased and objective moderator you can trust without question,  to cry if anyone suggests removing sigs from meta.

Please present the evidence of the "rubbish" we are posting?  I think you are confusing it with observable truth that demonstrates your friends who you enable on to the trust system are liars, scammers, and implicated in extortion schemes and trust abuse, account sales, racist trolling sig spamming under sock puppet accounts for extra btc crumbs.
If you can not produce the evidence that we are posting rubbish then you will delete it. If you refuse to delete. We will bring a thread for moderators making false accusations and spreading lies. Now produce the "rubbish" that we have posted please. Or remove your false allegations. You have freedom of speech, but  spreading false information means you can get called on that and given a title appropriate to those spreading false information. For a moderator, in a position of trust, then you need to be more accountable than just a new member for the things that you claim.

Did you mean to say rubbish hilarious? or did you mean to say we are spreading observably true information? that is on topic and relevant?

Can you see past your feeble straw men? where do you see me claiming people should have ANY punishment for free speech?  I think you are confusing this with spreading false information whilst being in positions of trust, like you just did. Unless you believe you can demonstrate that observable truths are "rubbish"?

I think we are saying that observable double standards, liars, scammers, extortionists and their supporters have NO place inside a trust system. That is not the same thing as stating people can not say whatever they like so long as they have compelling evidence or observable instances to demonstrate it is true, or can build a strong case that it is true. If they are not in a position of trust, then perhaps they can say whatever they like, with no come back, other than to get called to provide evidence to substantiate what they claim.

I hope you are going to validate, and provide evidence for your seemingly very biased and inaccurate post.

A disgrace of a moderator. Imagine publicly vouching for scammers, liars, trust abusers, probable extortionist, greedy sig spamming racist trolling sock puppets?  You will and should be held accountable if they leverage those positions to pull a huge scam.

But you are still here? you qualify clearly as a scammer, a liar, a troll (spreading false information repeatedly). You will be dearly missed as an example of all that is wrong with the trust system.
The board is sinking in chaos due to primarily lauda's and his crew (TMAN and owlcatz and yogg) new found entry back into a position of trust, after people correctly recognize, getting punished for lesser crimes or just telling the truth by persons that have observably lied, scammed, trust abused, been implicated in a probable extortion scheme is not very fair.

They also notice, you are punishing them for behaviors you refuse to punish others self confessed EVIL members for.

Yes the board will fall in to chaos. It is just getting warmed up I believe.

What kind of members would put up with this kind of observably double standards abuse and gaming of the systems right before their eyes?

Theymos does not openly support them, however some moderators DO. They should be removed. Theymos seems stuck in that he is not willing to enforce his will. He clearly said trust should be for scammers and those strongly likely to scam. Lauda just said fuck off I will red trust anyone I like. End of discussion.

Each day the abusers are more emboldened by theymos's inaction. Also theymos seems VERY liberal on what a scam is. Lying for financial gain does not seem to fit with his definition of a scam. Lauda is apparently possibly neutral according to theymos. He busts others tiny scammers in droves (or so we are meant to believe) then lies, scams, possibly tries to extort other members and trust abuses anyone that presents clear observable examples of his behavior for his own financial gain... so we are left to endure this untrustworthy dirt as part of the policing system here because it may balance out??. This is a big mistake. Nobody will accept punishment for lesser crimes than those giving out the punishment are clearly guilty of. One such crime apparently is telling the truth. I would rather see total chaos than an orderly gamed and abused system by a tiny untrustworthy fraction of the members here.

The systems of merit and trust are broken and rely on persons acting as unselfishly as possible where financial reward is clearly available with zero safeguards in place? They actually provide incentive and reward to abuse them. It is the most dangerous experiment that I have seen on this board since inception.

Evidence in the form of observable instances can be produced upon request to support these statements.

Only terrible and not  EVIL ?

coinlicker$ who? his illustrious past must have sneaked past our notice.

I see. Only Tman and lauda are allowed to call people 3rd world pajeets?  Are they EVIL ?

I think I am exposing the truth? people can witness what is there in black and white. It is clearly observable. Are you claiming you did not say those things and then try to sell your account so it can be (in your view) be used in an EVIL way to scam people?

You are exposing your true colors. PURE RED. Thanks for volunteering yourself as a prime example of everything wrong EVIL with DT.

Please refer to CH as the true legend cryptohunter or the 2 000 000 000 dollar legend in future. We prefer EVIL persons do not mention the sacred member at all if possible. Thank you.

Oh yes, that reminds us. You were also a scam pusher and promoter. If we recall correctly the true legend was behind the 2 000 000 000 USD value air drop they offered as compensation to all miners by your fav old scam project. Just wanted to drop the insignificant accomplishment of the true legend's in there, to make fair comparison to coinlicker$ list of marvelous accomplishments we never heard about. Good sig spammer though for a new 3rd world doggy. Throw it some merit morsels to make it's day.

More EVIL lies from the self confessed EVIL and dubious ex member and certainly non legend notildah.

Looks like the true legend reduced to newbie rank. Looks like someone hacked the 2 000 000 000 dollar legend. Perhaps he is not banned? There is hope for a second coming? is there not supposed to be 3 days before his rising? perhaps he is enjoying too much fine wine and women on his vacation?

Speak of the devil ,PURE EVIL no less (KEEP READING lol). the self confessed scam enabler, account seller, btc beggar appears. To make false allegations and beg to silence me from telling the truth about him.

" this DT member nutildah is lecturing others here in 2014 on why they should NOT sell their accounts, firmly states that selling accounts leaves other member vulnerable to getting scammed.... and that they should be red trusted .

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789658.msg9062680#msg9062680

then he decides to sell their own account in 2016 so just 180 degree goes against everything they were previously claiming.... and does not give a care if he facilitates people getting scammed now that he stands to gain 0.3btc? prime trustworthy DT material, I'm sure.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.5 "

my own previous investigative work.

This is my favorite part of his views on account selling from 2014 before he sold or tried to sell his own account




Thank to notildah for presenting himself as one piece of evidence of double standards DT's that are observably untrustworthy. Is it the original nutildah? or a new member impersonating the old scam enabler nutildah?

His observably lying and scamming friend lauda now says that he has flagged other accounts from back then that offered accounts for sale BUT there is NOTHING that will cause him to red flag his scam enabling friends account? I see. No double standards there then.

Lauda will red tag people that encourage others to review his own post history though?  DT in action.

This is not the worst example of DT's colluding to game the system for themselves and their friends either. Obviously in notildahs case the gaming and asskissing  has not paid off because recently he is found begging for 0.02btc loans. Not a risk on DT at all. But justiceforyou was high risk and must be flagged. I see.

Thanks for breaking my local rules notildah, you will still be reported and deleted. Or questions will be asked as to why.

I agree most members are consigned to this kind of attitude. So it is join them or be silenced by them.

Not us.

There is something we can do. It is called presenting the observable events that demonstrate they are clearly abusing the trust system to silence the truth regarding their previous scamming, lying and other untrustworthy behaviors and to game the entire system for their own selfish gain.

Then let bitcointalk announce you do not have the right to present observable events from the history of this board about DT members in the rules. DT members are allowed to scam, lie, extort, trust abuse and deploy double standards when ever they like and you will be cast as a scammer for mentioning those things. Put that in the rules, and we can just all abide by them, or move to a board where each member is treated fairly and equally.