Show Posts
I read the whole thread again. There are some things that I have to criticize. Let's start at the beginning.
As you can easily see, my concern was smiled at by TMAN at the beginning. Then Lauda turned on and she also ridiculed my concern. She immediately labeled me someone who was after her and her entourage. Which is not true. aTriz is responsible for being mentioned and accused. Any normal-minded person would have seen a danger in him through his dealings with alia. As I said, he is responsible for that. This example shows the climate between the users in this thread. People who accuse Laudas entourage (in this example it is aTriz and I'm pretty sure that if I had not mentioned aTriz, they would still have ridiculed my worries or the thread anyway. Of course, I can not prove this in retrospect) of being involved in a scam are ridiculed from the start instead of taking the matter seriously and following it up. Instead, I'm made the culprit. In addition, the same people claim that I just opened the thread to target them all, which is ridiculous. No, not only Lauda has claimed this, but also QS. The problem with the whole thing now is that they all seem to be under paranoia and any accusation that goes in their direction is seen as an attack on them. They do not want to understand that the world is not just about them. There are people who give a shit on your quarrel (OG, QS, Lauda, etc.). Do you now realize why I had to create an alt account? I just do not want to get into your toddler fight because they do not interest me and just annoying me. I'm pretty sure that most users are now annoyed by these toddler fights. All of them, just like all shitposter and scammer, make the forum a little bad. Do not get me wrong, I like this forum, but that's another reason why this forum has lost in quality.
Instead of apologizing to me, the same people who have made me the perpetrator have nothing more to say. That's so, I'm sorry that I have to say so, very pathetic. However, when ibminer researched and gave his opinion on it, naturally everything turned for these people and they became quite calm. Thanks again to ibminer!
Let's get back to the present. I just do not understand why, after alia lied so often and obviously (Dave story), you still get a chance. Okay, let's assume she's verified. Does her shady actions do better? Do we really want to believe and support an obvious scammer who has been waiting for the largest possible sum? On the one hand, other users are immediately painted red and ignored (scammer is just right), but on the other hand, alia is given so many chances, even though she is obviously a scammer. I just do not understand this hypocrisy.
Anyone who thinks everything has been done now is wrong! Let us come to an equally important topic. Let's get to aTriz. Let's just assume that he actually was not involved in the long-term scam. Does it make his acting so much better? I do not think so. He proved that you can not trust him. First he claims that their method works 100% and now he claims that he does not know how the system works. I have to admit, I also do not know how it works, but after seeing posts from users who apparently knew what they're talking about, I realized there was something shady about her method.
The question now is, how can someone with a status of aTriz (yes, he is not a DT member, but he still enjoys a certain status!) praise a very questionable (from the moral point of view I do not even talk, that is also an issue!) method. Imagine I never opened this thread. I'm pretty sure alia could have scammed some people because of aTriz review. She could have broadened her network and scammed more and more potential victims. Somehow nobody thinks about this.
Any other user in this case would have already been painted red (which would be absolutely correct in this case!). Why is not he painted red? After all, he has put himself in this predicament. He proved that he can not bear any responsibility.
Even if it was just luck on my part (it was not!) there was not even a "thank you" from all the skeptics. As I have mentioned many times. They just can not admit they were wrong, because they always want to be right. Before those answer to which my post is addressed. Take your time and just think about your actions!
As you can easily see, my concern was smiled at by TMAN at the beginning. Then Lauda turned on and she also ridiculed my concern. She immediately labeled me someone who was after her and her entourage. Which is not true. aTriz is responsible for being mentioned and accused. Any normal-minded person would have seen a danger in him through his dealings with alia. As I said, he is responsible for that. This example shows the climate between the users in this thread. People who accuse Laudas entourage (in this example it is aTriz and I'm pretty sure that if I had not mentioned aTriz, they would still have ridiculed my worries or the thread anyway. Of course, I can not prove this in retrospect) of being involved in a scam are ridiculed from the start instead of taking the matter seriously and following it up. Instead, I'm made the culprit. In addition, the same people claim that I just opened the thread to target them all, which is ridiculous. No, not only Lauda has claimed this, but also QS. The problem with the whole thing now is that they all seem to be under paranoia and any accusation that goes in their direction is seen as an attack on them. They do not want to understand that the world is not just about them. There are people who give a shit on your quarrel (OG, QS, Lauda, etc.). Do you now realize why I had to create an alt account? I just do not want to get into your toddler fight because they do not interest me and just annoying me. I'm pretty sure that most users are now annoyed by these toddler fights. All of them, just like all shitposter and scammer, make the forum a little bad. Do not get me wrong, I like this forum, but that's another reason why this forum has lost in quality.
Instead of apologizing to me, the same people who have made me the perpetrator have nothing more to say. That's so, I'm sorry that I have to say so, very pathetic. However, when ibminer researched and gave his opinion on it, naturally everything turned for these people and they became quite calm. Thanks again to ibminer!
Let's get back to the present. I just do not understand why, after alia lied so often and obviously (Dave story), you still get a chance. Okay, let's assume she's verified. Does her shady actions do better? Do we really want to believe and support an obvious scammer who has been waiting for the largest possible sum? On the one hand, other users are immediately painted red and ignored (scammer is just right), but on the other hand, alia is given so many chances, even though she is obviously a scammer. I just do not understand this hypocrisy.
Anyone who thinks everything has been done now is wrong! Let us come to an equally important topic. Let's get to aTriz. Let's just assume that he actually was not involved in the long-term scam. Does it make his acting so much better? I do not think so. He proved that you can not trust him. First he claims that their method works 100% and now he claims that he does not know how the system works. I have to admit, I also do not know how it works, but after seeing posts from users who apparently knew what they're talking about, I realized there was something shady about her method.
The question now is, how can someone with a status of aTriz (yes, he is not a DT member, but he still enjoys a certain status!) praise a very questionable (from the moral point of view I do not even talk, that is also an issue!) method. Imagine I never opened this thread. I'm pretty sure alia could have scammed some people because of aTriz review. She could have broadened her network and scammed more and more potential victims. Somehow nobody thinks about this.
Any other user in this case would have already been painted red (which would be absolutely correct in this case!). Why is not he painted red? After all, he has put himself in this predicament. He proved that he can not bear any responsibility.
Even if it was just luck on my part (it was not!) there was not even a "thank you" from all the skeptics. As I have mentioned many times. They just can not admit they were wrong, because they always want to be right. Before those answer to which my post is addressed. Take your time and just think about your actions!
Since aTriz responsibility and credibility is not discussed in the actual topic, I have quoted a part of my opinion.
~
I don't see how the deal with aTriz is related to the other stuff. Why are you writing using the 'he' pronoun here "he shows no evidence.."?
Wait a minute Lauda. Something is very fishy here.I don't see how the deal with aTriz is related to the other stuff. Why are you writing using the 'he' pronoun here "he shows no evidence.."?
alia all of sudden decided to close this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2966705.0 because "she has found big investors"(on Feb. 25.) and after that she opened new(self-moderated) thread(on Feb. 26) offering winning script and aTriz confirmed that it is winning script:
Was given a vouch copy of the method by op and played around with in with funds from the faucet.
In my limited experience if it, I profited and worked perfectly. Would recommend.
I made an extremely good ROI, and I’m sure that others who buy the method will experience similar results. Thanks, Alia!
In my limited experience if it, I profited and worked perfectly. Would recommend.
I made an extremely good ROI, and I’m sure that others who buy the method will experience similar results. Thanks, Alia!
How someone with 7+ trust rate can say such stupid thing in such thread? It is EV- game, such script DOESN'T exist. Also he is recommending something which he has tried from faucet? He said he made extremely good ROI? From faucet?
That is just fucked up.
Besides, Selling winning scripts is equal to scamming people, and whoever offered such script in past was bashed by everyone
Also, it would be OK if users mentioned in this locked thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2966705.msg30479531#msg30479531 confirm that they watched her gambling and winning money and not only striping:
Quote
nullius 0.01 0.02 200%
slaman29 0.1 0.107 107%
v4d1mm 0.0475 0.052 109%
TelevisionLover 0.1 0.109 109%
SyGambler 0.01 0.012 120%
live:tonyl6 2.5 2.8 112%
favours 0.8 0.88 110%
slaman29 0.1 0.107 107%
v4d1mm 0.0475 0.052 109%
TelevisionLover 0.1 0.109 109%
SyGambler 0.01 0.012 120%
live:tonyl6 2.5 2.8 112%
favours 0.8 0.88 110%
I don't even want to comment her illegal money laundry tax evade service.
He actually put it in a nutshell!
Link to the thread
EDIT:
Preface
I think a few words are in order about why I am peculiarly interested in this topic. It goes beyond my own liking for aTriz: I feel a certain sense of moral responsiblity in the matter.
As I made clear to “alia” near the end of the last thread:
I think a great many people never would have even heard of Alia, if not for actions on my own part. I was well-intended—and I was neither the first nor only one fooled. But I did get fooled; and I raised her profile.
Especially in the Legendary section, I think a good many of you reading this can attest to yourselves that you never even would have heard of Alia, were it not for me.
On that last point, aTriz will need to speak for himself. Though I seriously doubt that Alia would have ever come to his attention if not for me, I do not have any direct knowledge of how he found her signature-sale thread, nor of private business dealings between them.
scam_detector, whoever you are, I thought you came off reasonably in the other thread when we settled your accusation against me, and also when I nailed Alia for having to known Dave from “the best” “wallet recovery service” (Dave speaks). I also will here assume good faith on your part, since you were the one who brought the Alia matter to light.
To better keep focus on the substantive issues, first I wish to point out a few things about where the Alia scam thread got off track.
Please do understand the response by people who are in fact subjected to daily troll attacks by known as well as new sockpuppet accounts. You may disdain these ongoing feuds—but the people involved in them can’t, not when they get spurious attack threads launched against them which sometimes grow to 15 pages in the first day.
If you were to deal with that every day—well, foremost, I think that’s really why you avoid these feuds. Also, why you are using an alt account. You don’t want to deal with that every day. For if you did, it would eat your time; and you would quite reasonably come to develop some reflexes about an anonymous party hurling about accusations. Ok, it’s this today.
I do think that this is the reason why no action was taken until ibminer tagged Alia and posted in that thread.
For my part, you will observe, I did not enter that thread with a simple “go away, troll” response to you. That was indeed my own initial reflex; and I wrote a post to such effect. The reason why that was never posted was part prudence, part luck: Prudence, insofar as I have developed the habit of checking pertinent trust pages before I post about an issue; and luck, because RGBKey and Joel_Jantsen had tagged Alia.
I didn’t take you seriously, scam_detector. I took RGBKey seriously, because I have interacted with him in Development & Technology Discussion; I know he’s smart, and not a troll. Moreover, his negative was reinforced by the harsh words in Joel_Jantsen’s neutral (since changed to negative).
I slammed on the brakes when I saw that. Then, ibminer posted...
The foregoing is illustrative of why you received the initial response you did, quoted above.
Another problem with that thread was the way you tied the Alia and aTriz issues together. Being somewhat closer to the situation than you are—I snorted when I saw that. The very title made it come off like the wacky sorts of accusations heard here daily. Of course, this problem should be solved by the dividing of issues between threads.
Now here, I think it is wise to presume your intent is to state in good faith what you believe to be a meritorious accusation against aTriz.
I think the most reasonable discussion of that would be served by not allowing conflation of spurious issues. In the Alia thread, I identified discussion of four different issues—two Alia issues (which are here offtopic), and two aTriz issues.
One issue on-topic here, and (I think) not raised by you anywhere, is the spurious insinuation that aTriz did something wrong by locking in a three-year signature contract with Alia. I think it’s clear, aTriz got scammed—and that’s the long and short of the matter. In the absence of any cogent reason to the contrary, I would suggest explicitly dismissing this as a frivolous issue so as to focus on the gambling issue.
On the gambling issue, it is difficult for me to reach a firm opinion. As I said in the Alia thread, I don’t know enough about gambling to assess this issue. I have trouble following the discussion, since I do not know all the jargon. It would take me hours of reading to even begin to get a handle on the issue, when I am already exhausted (now awake much >24 hours due to this Alia blowup...). I’d be interested in hearing what unbiased, technically competent persons who know gambling have to say about the matter.
I do think it’s clear that aTriz doesn’t know anything about scripting on a technical level.
Also, missing from your thread-split OP is the question of culpability. Somebody who knowingly promotes a scam is much worse than somebody who is scammed into believing in a scam. When you write this:
Well, what would you do without the “users who apparently knew what they’re talking about”? What if you, scam_detector, with your current level of gambling knowledge, were told by somebody who seemed knowledgeable that “their method works 100%”, etc.?
You might say that you’d avoid such a situation. That’s easy to say when you are not in the situation. Now, consider if a scammer has already engendered your trust sufficiently to lock you into long-term contracts with much prepayment. The person is a sort of “rising star”, admired on the forum and apparently well-liked by some technically competent people. That person apparently shows knowledge superior to yours—then tells you, “this will work 100%”.
Context can be important. Without knowing the technical gambling part or what the script actually did, the best I can guess is: aTriz probably did something at best foolhardy, at worst foolhardy; and he got scammed.
By keeping focused on a calm, reasonable examination of what Alia’s script did, gambling-wise—what aTriz knew or should have known about it—and what aTriz did or didn’t do about it, I think the matter can be handled without 25-page flamewars which are 90% off those topics. On my presumption of you’re here, I believe that to be your goal, scam_detector.
I will now mostly defer to people who actually understand gambling issues. Frankly, I myself would like to see this explained. However, unless/until I crash asleep, I will promptly drive a spike through anything which looks like blaming the victim for getting scammed out of a three-year contract, etc. (That issue, I very well do understand.)
I think a few words are in order about why I am peculiarly interested in this topic. It goes beyond my own liking for aTriz: I feel a certain sense of moral responsiblity in the matter.
As I made clear to “alia” near the end of the last thread:
How do I break this to you gently?
Do you even realize who put your account where it is right now, within the past twelve days? Instant fame. A circle of admirers in the Legendary and Hero ranks. Hmmm.
It wasn’t you who did that. Granted, I needed decent material to work with. But it wasn’t you who deliberately spread your name and links to your threads all over threads you didn’t even follow, which were followed by people who respect me.
Sorry to burst your bubble, hon. “You’d be surprised.”
Do you even realize who put your account where it is right now, within the past twelve days? Instant fame. A circle of admirers in the Legendary and Hero ranks. Hmmm.
It wasn’t you who did that. Granted, I needed decent material to work with. But it wasn’t you who deliberately spread your name and links to your threads all over threads you didn’t even follow, which were followed by people who respect me.
Sorry to burst your bubble, hon. “You’d be surprised.”
I think a great many people never would have even heard of Alia, if not for actions on my own part. I was well-intended—and I was neither the first nor only one fooled. But I did get fooled; and I raised her profile.
Especially in the Legendary section, I think a good many of you reading this can attest to yourselves that you never even would have heard of Alia, were it not for me.
On that last point, aTriz will need to speak for himself. Though I seriously doubt that Alia would have ever come to his attention if not for me, I do not have any direct knowledge of how he found her signature-sale thread, nor of private business dealings between them.
scam_detector, whoever you are, I thought you came off reasonably in the other thread when we settled your accusation against me, and also when I nailed Alia for having to known Dave from “the best” “wallet recovery service” (Dave speaks). I also will here assume good faith on your part, since you were the one who brought the Alia matter to light.
To better keep focus on the substantive issues, first I wish to point out a few things about where the Alia scam thread got off track.
In addition, the same people claim that I just opened the thread to target them all, which is ridiculous. No, not only Lauda has claimed this, but also QS. The problem with the whole thing now is that they all seem to be under paranoia and any accusation that goes in their direction is seen as an attack on them. They do not want to understand that the world is not just about them. There are people who give a shit on your quarrel (OG, QS, Lauda, etc.). Do you now realize why I had to create an alt account?
Please do understand the response by people who are in fact subjected to daily troll attacks by known as well as new sockpuppet accounts. You may disdain these ongoing feuds—but the people involved in them can’t, not when they get spurious attack threads launched against them which sometimes grow to 15 pages in the first day.
If you were to deal with that every day—well, foremost, I think that’s really why you avoid these feuds. Also, why you are using an alt account. You don’t want to deal with that every day. For if you did, it would eat your time; and you would quite reasonably come to develop some reflexes about an anonymous party hurling about accusations. Ok, it’s this today.
I do think that this is the reason why no action was taken until ibminer tagged Alia and posted in that thread.
For my part, you will observe, I did not enter that thread with a simple “go away, troll” response to you. That was indeed my own initial reflex; and I wrote a post to such effect. The reason why that was never posted was part prudence, part luck: Prudence, insofar as I have developed the habit of checking pertinent trust pages before I post about an issue; and luck, because RGBKey and Joel_Jantsen had tagged Alia.
I didn’t take you seriously, scam_detector. I took RGBKey seriously, because I have interacted with him in Development & Technology Discussion; I know he’s smart, and not a troll. Moreover, his negative was reinforced by the harsh words in Joel_Jantsen’s neutral (since changed to negative).
I slammed on the brakes when I saw that. Then, ibminer posted...
The foregoing is illustrative of why you received the initial response you did, quoted above.
Another problem with that thread was the way you tied the Alia and aTriz issues together. Being somewhat closer to the situation than you are—I snorted when I saw that. The very title made it come off like the wacky sorts of accusations heard here daily. Of course, this problem should be solved by the dividing of issues between threads.
Now here, I think it is wise to presume your intent is to state in good faith what you believe to be a meritorious accusation against aTriz.
I think the most reasonable discussion of that would be served by not allowing conflation of spurious issues. In the Alia thread, I identified discussion of four different issues—two Alia issues (which are here offtopic), and two aTriz issues.
One issue on-topic here, and (I think) not raised by you anywhere, is the spurious insinuation that aTriz did something wrong by locking in a three-year signature contract with Alia. I think it’s clear, aTriz got scammed—and that’s the long and short of the matter. In the absence of any cogent reason to the contrary, I would suggest explicitly dismissing this as a frivolous issue so as to focus on the gambling issue.
On the gambling issue, it is difficult for me to reach a firm opinion. As I said in the Alia thread, I don’t know enough about gambling to assess this issue. I have trouble following the discussion, since I do not know all the jargon. It would take me hours of reading to even begin to get a handle on the issue, when I am already exhausted (now awake much >24 hours due to this Alia blowup...). I’d be interested in hearing what unbiased, technically competent persons who know gambling have to say about the matter.
I do think it’s clear that aTriz doesn’t know anything about scripting on a technical level.
Also, missing from your thread-split OP is the question of culpability. Somebody who knowingly promotes a scam is much worse than somebody who is scammed into believing in a scam. When you write this:
First he claims that their method works 100% and now he claims that he does not know how the system works. I have to admit, I also do not know how it works, but after seeing posts from users who apparently knew what they're talking about, I realized there was something shady about her method.
Well, what would you do without the “users who apparently knew what they’re talking about”? What if you, scam_detector, with your current level of gambling knowledge, were told by somebody who seemed knowledgeable that “their method works 100%”, etc.?
You might say that you’d avoid such a situation. That’s easy to say when you are not in the situation. Now, consider if a scammer has already engendered your trust sufficiently to lock you into long-term contracts with much prepayment. The person is a sort of “rising star”, admired on the forum and apparently well-liked by some technically competent people. That person apparently shows knowledge superior to yours—then tells you, “this will work 100%”.
Context can be important. Without knowing the technical gambling part or what the script actually did, the best I can guess is: aTriz probably did something at best foolhardy, at worst foolhardy; and he got scammed.
By keeping focused on a calm, reasonable examination of what Alia’s script did, gambling-wise—what aTriz knew or should have known about it—and what aTriz did or didn’t do about it, I think the matter can be handled without 25-page flamewars which are 90% off those topics. On my presumption of you’re here, I believe that to be your goal, scam_detector.
I will now mostly defer to people who actually understand gambling issues. Frankly, I myself would like to see this explained. However, unless/until I crash asleep, I will promptly drive a spike through anything which looks like blaming the victim for getting scammed out of a three-year contract, etc. (That issue, I very well do understand.)
Three letters. WOW. I had to let it sink first. I did not think a post could change my mind about another person (aTriz), but your post did it. Your post is a perfect example of how to argue conclusively and calmly. After reading your post I feel bad about having brought a very likely innocent person (aTriz) in connection with a scammer (alia) or accusing aTriz to be involved in the scam. I still believe that his actions should have consequences, but no longer think he should be painted red. That would be too harsh a punishment for which he most likely just naive acted. You have just climbed a level in my personal trust level (nullius).
I am very sorry aTriz. I acted too fast and thoughtless.
) and here is my explanation why you should be very careful when dealing with the User "alia" (u=1764044).
