Bitcoin Forum
April 20, 2024, 01:35:09 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 »
1  Other / Meta / Indisputable evidence that ONE MOD here is corrupt and needs removal on: January 14, 2020, 01:46:08 PM
Read this thread and understand the wider implications even if you are willing to let is slip because it is our account. The ETHICS of this are fucked.

We noticed a thread Requesting our own ban here on meta (based on false grounds that we had told lies about other members) on that thread we had requested evidence of these lies, the people there are STILL FAILING to present the LIES.  They do not exist that is why, they simply want the truth to be silenced that is why.

AT the same time some scumbag moved tmans thread requesting THE SAME on the SAME spurious grounds from REP to meta to bolster the " opinions" of scammers that we should be banned for presenting THE TRUTH about the.

Also some mod at the SAME TIME deleted 4 of our on topic relevant posts.

SO here we have 2 threads based on OBSERVABLE FALSE ACCUSATIONS ALLOWED TO STAY IN META, they do not even attempt to present evidence because they KNOW there is NO EVIDENCE they simply do not LIKE us telling the TRUTH about them and their pals. TOUGH SHIT MOFOS.

We created a thread of a similar/identical nature requesting TMAN be banned. OUR thread compiled undeniable observable instances of TMans auction scamming, extortion, blackmail, self confessed trust abuse and proliferation of a mass of other UNDENIABLE negatives this person fills the board with. I MEAN REAL REASONS THAT POSE A CLEAR DANGER TO OTHER MEMBERS AND REAL REASONS THAT SOMEONE COULD BE PUNISHED FOR.


This is clear and indisputable evidence that one of the mods here ( obviously hilarious and co ) is allowing only a ONE SIDED AND INCORRECT REPRESENTATION  of events. This is SCAMMING. You can not silence the truth and PUSH LIES and be a moderator. This is disgraceful.

How can this be permitted?HuhHuhHuhHuhHuh

We did quote such moons post from that thread.

Who here can prove that thread was deleted and archive it??
How can our thread be deleted??? when it was stacked full of indisputable independently verifiable reasons that demonstrate someone is completely dangerous and net negative. THEN LEAVE threads we have debunked as pure garbage?? THIS MOD NEEDS REMOVAL it is UNDENIABLE.

Who can resurrect that thread so we can debate why OURS is removed when it is TRUE and their threads LFC and TMAN threads remain and they are FALSE

That is a post we quoted that proves this happened. Who can prove that thread did exist?? There is NOT EVEN ANY EVIDENCE OF THIS IN OUR MESSAGES which usually registers the spurious deletes??

LoyceV could but obviously he will say he is too busy to do it.

This is one the STRONGEST examples of MODS being in on this 2 tier system. It is undeniable.

How the fuck do you remove a request for ban BASED on observable TRUTHS then leave 2 requests for that persons ban based on LIES they can not even produce any evidence to support when called on it.

Bogus scum bag mod needs to be kicked off here. There is NO OTHER explanation. THE MOST clear example of ONE SIDED moderation. There can be NO DENIAL.


where is that thread HuhHuhHuhHuhHuh??

When the corruption goes to the highest levels then you really do need to worry. I mean if it stopped at sub admin level then you had a SLIGHT outside chance to pull these scammers out of their entrenched positions. BUT WHEN mods are in on that crew you are totally FUCKED. They can just delete your posts at will and if you can not post then you really have ZERO chance. The forum is fucked if they allow this type of one sided corrupt moderation.

Some mod is out of control. Get them OUT FFS. They are meant to be impartial.

If you let mods get involved in board politics and paid by sig campaign managers that are also political then you will never have impartial moderation. I mean they should really not be posting from 2 accounts to max their sig spamming income and including people with proven financial wrong doing in their past. HOW THE FUCK can this type of person be relied upon to be an impartial moderator LOL


2  Other / Meta / THE FINAL SHOWDOWN - ALL DT , MODS and THEYMOS -- take us of ignore!!!!! on: January 13, 2020, 05:01:21 PM
Here is your FINAL CHANCE GUYS. We shall likely NOT return at all again after the next 2 days. It is time to start enjoying ourselves (even more) . We have a lot of fun living ahead of us, and perhaps not even time enough to burn though the resources we have already accumulated here regardless of the lavish system we will choose to do it in. Thanks to theymos and this forum for that. No question we are grateful and appreciate this forum has and still is a great place for the most part. We wish many more our similar success.

Let's give you ALL one last opportunity to clearly demonstrate the lack of value, and TROLLING of our posts.

This is NOT just about US and YOU. This can be a useful thread to demonstrate clearly what is valuable and what is not valuable to the reader who seeks the true and correct information to form the optimal and best opinion and to educated themselves to the fullest potential.

It seems the fine DT, the mods, and even Theymos have determined we are boring trolls, who spew forth lies, a false information regarding the systems of control and the members they empower into positions of trust and the most lucrative positions here. Not only that, our claims that the systems of control and those gaming them are openly creating a 2 tier system that stifles free speech via the stick of trust abuse, and the carrot of merit (or merit starvation).

All you have to do is bring forth those central points we have made regarding those points mentioned above that have been debunked or demonstrated to be clearly untrue. Specifically about untrustworthy (in a serious and dangerous way explicitly having observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their past) being in positions of trust and abusing that trust. Also perhaps leveraging those very positions to endanger honest users.

You have nearly 2 days. After that time we can respond no more. It will be time to leave and do all of the things we want to try and experience whilst we are still in our youth.

We will not reply for sometime to allow you all to come forth with ANY and ALL examples you can provide here for our final analysis and scrutiny and for us to purge..

Let's try to refrain from swearing at each other and immediately trying to derail this thread. We will remain civil if others do.

Keep in mind, that we state that nobody has debunked a single central point regarding those aspects and neither has any clearly demonstrated how our posts are off topic or irrelevant at all when we call for scrutiny. ESPECIALLY considering what mods mark as bad when we report it. Like huge signs saying don't feed the troll or who who made this cunt bleed in response to an intial post that calls for system wide debate regarding observable instances that are independently verifiable and true. Then at times MERIT THEM lol.

Let's go guys. Else we leave with big smug smile that 50 or more of the "best" and most "trustworthy" posters of all of bitcointalk were just bitch slapped around by us for a year with NO ANSWER AT ALL to our central points that demonstrated they were corrupt scum that either were financially high risk or who would support those that clearly are, just to be part of their "group" and spam their sigs. I mean that is without the clear admissions of such by LFC and VOD claiming the system makes them support such dangerous individuals ..we can provide the evidence if you need reminding.

So lets go guys, trolling, bullshit, nonsense, zero value, should be banned, let's have the final show down. Bring your best case to substantiate your claims. This is a great system wide experiment, you just get to use our own account to demonstrate your opinions.

Let's get the party started. We have asked, requested and instructed time and time and time and time and time again for the evidence of all this incorrect and debunked pile of steaming lies and nonsense we keep spreading over your honest and upright names and what enables and entrenches your double standards abuse.

All we hear is silence??  Not one single example of any central point regarding any of those things you can demonstrate are untrue and incorrect after AN ENTIRE YEAR AND OVER 1000 opposition posts to you all??

Get your heads together here and get the part started. We will give it a couple of hours consideration before we fly out on the start of a very long and very expensive "vacation" in a day or so.

Let's get the party started........... or will it be a flop with NO examples provided by ANYONE AT ALL??? and we leave victorious and unchallenged.

So far it just sounds like you want to get people BANNED who dare expose observable instances of your financially motivated wrong doing or demonstrate you will support such people for your own self interest.

It seems fighting for transparent rules that ensure all members are treated equally is a very unpopular, trolling, zero value, concept haha.

That's a shame.

3  Economy / Reputation / _Darkstar - chipmixer is it sponsoring TROLLS and Liars??????????????????? on: January 13, 2020, 03:18:09 PM
It has come to our attention that chipmixer appears to be sponsoring MANY people on that are listed on this thread.

1./ Now keep in mind many of those do NOT deny or refute those observable instances presented there, because they are true

2. These same individuals all appear to be spreading lies and trolling us specifically. THEY REPEATEDLY CLAIMS that our posts that DETAIL those observable instances regarding them and their behaviors are untrue and NONSENSE they also claim that means we are trolling and should be banned.

I would like you to investigate this matter. They repeatedly make these FALSE claims that we have challenged them to present evidence of MANY TIMES and they run away and refuse to present the evidence??

This is spreading false and incorrect information repeatedly and meets the forums definition of trolling. What are you going to do about this.

I would like your answers to INCLUDE observable instances and examples to support any of the counter points you make.

Chipmixer seems to be the main sponsor and main motivator for the double standards trust abuse and 2 tier system that is springing up here.

Can you present here a transparent and clear set of rules that YOU can demonstrate that YOU as the chipmixer campaign manager  investigate personally to ensure CHIPMIXER is not being infiltrated by scammers and scammer supporters, trust abusers and trolls that will damage the reputation of chipmixer long term ??

I would like you to PERSONALLY investing the information presented in the dirty turds thread, and investigate those members that are continuously trolling and spreading false information on this forum.

Like we said. Please bring observable instances that demonstrate any claims we have made are bogus or untrue and WE WILL CHANGE THOSE AT ONCE. We only want to help you ensure chipmixer is not sponsoring some very dangerous scammer supporting trolls and liars here.

There are many FAR MORE HONEST members that do NOT have clear observable instances of UNTRUSTWORTHY behavior that are also capable of FAR better posting quality than you have on your chipmixer campaign.

Surely you want those that REALLY are the most trustworthy (lacking ANY form of documented untrustworthy behaviors) and those that can make the best posts right??? YOu are not simply going to claim at this stage that the OLD TRUST SYSTEM (famous for abuse to the extent we needed a new one, and is even now MORE open to abuse ) is the metric you use??? not that the moronic merit system is all you do to investigate the post quality and true value of members posts right???

We did not wish to embroil you in this BUT since you seem to be hiring a high % of trolls and scammer supporters and those observably guilty of other untrustworthy and unfair actions it seems best to warn you before chipmixer is blamed for the sponsoring a lot of members spreading false information and untrustworthy scum bags.

We await your explanations and reasoning accompanied with evidence that is independently verifiable. If you choose to not wish to become involved that is okay. We will ask chipmixer directly in the next thread if they like sponsoring these kind of members here.

Just because the systems of control are gamed by these types of manipulative and driven untrustworthy types does not mean you need to hire them does it??

Refer to the dirty turds thread and take into consideration only those with chipmixer sigs. If you need futher help focusing in on certain offenders just ask us.

I will populate this thread with chipmixer participants clearly untrustworthy and trolling transgressions as I have the time.

Dark star only or deleted

4  Economy / Reputation / OPEN CHALLENGE to o_e_l_e_o - Watch us humiliate this fucking troll in public ! on: January 13, 2020, 02:47:34 PM
This persons is clearly a scammer supporting fucking retard. But the retardation has reached critical level now. It is time for us to clearly humiliate and degrade his broken little mind in public

This is an OPEN CHALLENGE TO o_e_l_e_o ONLY.  Everyone else will be deleted (if we want)

I mean the guy is a full on fucking retard. Let's take this thread for example. This pretty much sums up his low functioning spew he keep plastering EVERYWHERE OFF TOPIC AND IRRELEVANT . What's more it is TROLLING and spreading LIES. #

Come here o_e_l_e_o you fucking retard, we will smash you up so bad in here that you will be running away crying. OR YOU WILL SIMPLY DARE NOT EVEN COME HERE AND DEBATE.

Unfortunately trolling is subjective.
I completely agree with your points regarding freedom of speech, but freedom of speech doesn't include freedom to disrupt and derail. I'd never dream of trying to have posts deleted or users banned simply because they are expressing unpopular opinions. The whole point of freedom of speech is protect unpopular opinions; popular opinions don't need protecting. I'm sure you've seen the relevant XKCD which explains it well. However, CH/TOAA (as an example), has literally been posting the same nonsense regarding trust/merit/gangs/inner circles/etc. for over a year now. Any thread remotely related to merit or trust, he shows up with the same wall of nonsense, and the thread is rapidly derailed. I don't know of anyone who has reasonably defended that, or possibly could, as "not trolling".

Furthermore, the most commonly broken rule is subjective too. Who decides what is low value or uninteresting? Why enforce the spam rule but not the trolling rule?


1/ Bring here and PRESENT NOW. ANY of our central points on the topics you claim are NONSENSE that you or ANYONE has debunked or demonstrate are untrue.

2/ Bring here the EXAMPLES Of topic and derailing posts that YOU can demonstrate are offtopic and derailing in the CONTEXT Of the posts you have made on our threads that are CLEARLY off topic and derailing.

3/ If you fail YOU HAVE BEEN TROLLING (presenting things as true that are incorrect and previously debunked) and spreading lies. Also acting in a double standards way claiming you do not need to be banned for derailing our threads but your FALSE claims are grounds we should be LOL

Get on it you drooling scammer supporting assfeltcher.

Watch how he either runs away , or we crush his fucking claims flat.

Hurry up dipshit, we are off on vacation soon and want to degrade you soon.

Chipmixer is soon going to need to explain WHY they are sponsoring many scammers supporters and trolls on this forum

These scum bags will do or say anything to keep spamming their chipmixer sigs.

Chipmixer seems to be sponsoring MOST of the dishonest, scammers supporting scum on this forum. That needs to be looked into in the future if that is still the case when we return.

5  Other / Meta / OFF TOPIC OR.... corrupt mods again will be hiding away????????????????????????? on: January 10, 2020, 11:40:45 PM
Discussing the LIST the initial poster has put and supporting QWKS request to be added to the list.

I expect to hear HOW this is off topic any more than ANY OTHER of the posts on that thread suggesting people for the list ? I see many people offering and commenting reasons to be added or removed from this list.

Mods hiding away and refusing to explain the deletes = corruption and scamming. Who reported, which mod deleted. Bring it here and we will debunk it like ALL of the previous corrupt moderation.

Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.


I hear you  Smiley  at your age, take what you can get right??

still it does not mean you should not be added to the list right??

I am supporting your addition to the list, please understand there is no need to fight me on this occasion. Our goals are aligned.

See sense ffs. Smiley

why object when I am supporting you? makes no sense?

Keep in mind the first quote by QWK is NOT the full post we made, he only quoted that tiny part. Which is fair enough. The rest of the post was a nicely explained reason why qwk is correct, he should be on the list. How is his own post not off topic??

This entire board is corrupt. Make no doubt about it running to the very top. This is becoming a quite an awful place. Thank good ness for our very long vacation coming on the 14th.

There is no way this can be off topic or irrelevant. Fucking mod scum stop hiding you cowardly cunts.
6  Other / Meta / DT opinions needed...don't be shy, speak up. NOT concerning ourselves !!!!!!!!!! on: January 10, 2020, 12:52:36 AM
Local rules - please no instant derailing and screaming personal insults to derail. If you want to scream and cry then fine but bring some substantial points and arguments with you that you can corroborate with observable instances. No boblawblaw spaz tard racial, deviant sexual fantasies, lacking any evidence to back up his garbled word salad straight off of the bat. Because we don't want to have to put you in your place again, and get more trust abuse... for daring to ask you keep on topic and relevant.

Great now that is all sorted......

I am interested to know the opinions of DT members , mods and even THEYMOS

Would the following type of post be generally considered

1. blackmail
2. extortion
3. the general actions of a very trustworthy scam hunter.

Please give me your explanation and not just a number. Thanks.We need it to update our notes on what blackmail/extortion here is.

Ediie !!!! now listen to me carefully. There are 4 ways of resolving all that B.S. created by you.

As you know I am one of the best scambiter on this forum;u=1094569

Also I got the biggest amount of false lags left by scammers (not something to be proud of) but just for information.;u=1094569;page=iflags

I am not pretending to be the best one (There are more better ones)

Now about the offer

I and my friends will start investigation regarding some project created by"Jim Blasko and his alias (In this case it is you)

My name, eddie13, was even on that website for some time as a "supporter" because I helped with reddit and the unbreakable auctions sites n stuff..

All that projects STOLE millions of customer's money and now all off them are officially not active with dead webites. You were in involved in that projects very actively. When the game was over Jim suddenly disapiared (Lost password, stolen account e.t.c..) No proof was presented and our lovely eddie appeared to announce that sad information.

Now lets go to project

 1  .Unbreakablecoin (UNB) created by "Jim Blasko" (Dead now) Some people are preparing a legal action against  Unbreakablecoin (UNB) and "Jim Blasko to find out where is their money. Same will happen with Jim's other projects.

2 .2 Another project of our lovely Jim called (Collected some money and disappeared) Website is off

3. Voxels (Collected some money and disappeared) Website is off  Website is off

I am just a lttle bit lazy to serch more, because I am sure we will find a lot of new info about creators of that wonderful projects

Eddie13 oficially admited that he

My name, eddie13, was even on that website for some time as a "supporter" because I helped with reddit and the unbreakable auctions sites n stuff..

Now here is my offer. You just stop posting B.S about me on the forum. I will do the same.

Or I will proceed with my investigation. I an sure some investors that lost their money will be very happy to find jim. Also police of different countries will happy to have a conversation with him

I mean if this is not blackmail nor extortion and is the actions of an honest and trustworthy scam "biter" then cool, we just need to hear you explain how this compares to other BLACKMAIL and EXTORTION that yogg and lauda are keen to point out and punish. We can run this comparison later on though. No need to bring that up here atm.

This is not to get personal. Let's just discuss it on the merits of being blackmail, extortion or trustworthy behavior of reliable, consistent scam biter.

Is this blackmail yogg?? where are you yogg? what about lauda?? can I hear your opinions on this lauda?? I bet those guys will be hard to find in this thread.

I realize these threads are easily missed. Do not worry we will be bumping it every few days until we have a comprehensive list of sensible DT feedback, so new users and our very good selves can understand what meets the threshold of blackmail/extortion here.

7  Other / Meta / SERIOUS QUESTION. HOW is this offtopic without lauda being offtopic??? on: January 08, 2020, 11:23:43 PM
Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by a Bitcoin Forum moderator. Posts are most frequently deleted because they are off-topic, though they can also be deleted for other reasons. In the future, please avoid posting things that need to be deleted.

Let me correct the "unwarranted" statement.  The feedback itself is appropriate.  It just isn't necessary.  That's what I should have written.  I am in no way criticizing you for negging this guy, because I wouldn't trust him either.
Yes please. It's quite a nuisance to be attacked for something that isn't necessary but is appropriate masked under the reasoning that it isn't appropriate. This is a general statement based off of sentiment over the last couple of months, not particularly saying that you've been attacking people! Content theft is by every definition stealing, therefore a trust-related action. How do we handle plagiarism? Forum staff bans the users. Should we vilify people who leave negative ratings for plagiarism, i.e. scamming? No.

Fork your own words if want fork. Stealing is a no go.

The "plagiarism" of posting some other persons work for helpful reasons is fucking requiring a BAN is bogus as fuck here WHEN you take it in the full context of the SCAMMING, EXTORTING, TRUSTABUSE and shady escrow and supporting other AUCTION SCAMMERS

Let's START WITH THE MOST SERIOUS SCAMMING, EXTORTING AND TRUST ABUSING scum like you first lauda, after we ban you, tman, nutildah, then we can start thinking up a more suitable punishments for those posting GUIDES to help others without giving FULL CREDIT to those that made the guide originally. Sure some punishment but lets start getting sensible here in the full context of the danger posed to members of this forum.
Like take their sigs away for a year.

SO yes let's delete his sigs for a year or 2 AFTER we have banned the scammers and extortionists and auction scammers like you.

Turns my stomach to see a fucking dirt bag like you and your scummy scammer supporter pals screaming these types of "plagiarists " must be banned IMMEDIATELY LOL

How did you get all cocky and start posting back on meta as if you have a snow white history here you croatian dog??

Myself or my good friends will NEVER stop reminding you that you don't get to call for bans and punishments for LESSER crimes than you have committed here many times.

Sure punish them, 2 year sig ban for helpful non financially motivated guides etc, BUT ONLY if we are punishing consistent scammers and extortionists and trust abusers with BANS FIRST.

The peado, rapist, murdering, armed robber,  crying DEATH PENALTY for the guy that shop lifted the 1cent candy LOL --- whilst the sicko thief murderer becomes a judge and jury all rolled into one and paid nicely ahahahahahah no thanks.

Negative trust is perhaps fine, but NOT protocol here is it??, although I see NO DIRECT financial risk of other members COMPARED to the scamming , extorting, auction scamming, trust abusing etc.

No more double standards in meta. You will be called on it EVERY TIME. No scammers get to cry for others punishments for LESSER deeds. Fuck off. If not by ourselves we have infinite friends that will ALWAYS be there to tell the truth.

These people do not give one fuck about plagiarism at all. They post memes or even pics with WORDING (guides, definitions, who passages of text etc) that would be classed as plagiarism if it were not in PICTURE form not text LOL that makes any fucking difference.

THEN they BEG for their own PALS chibitchity or whatever his name is to be reinstated after admitting he did plagiarize for financial reasons LOLLOLOLOL
Double standards.


The plagiarism aspect is clearly noted in the " abuse" of trust
Lauda speculates on the validity of it and implications of it.

We answer and BOOM off topic and irrelevant HOW SO??

Mods MORE than welcome to explain for clarity.

The abuse is based on plagiarism, which is a mod issue not red trust anyway right??? suggesting bans etc is just the icing on the cake from scammers?? is it off topic to say that SCAMMERS that pose a clear and direct danger to honest members should be taken care of 1st?? this is not permitted flow?? how so??

OUR post debates the legitimacy of the plagiarism claim, the motivation , the full context of punishment for dangers posed to honest members here??? and the right of scammers to call for bans for posting guides without full credits to the original creator??

Let's get to the bottom of this mystery???

WHO reported and WHO deleted??? enough is enough , lets debate and CLARIFY the permitted flow here on this forum. ANOTHER gamed and weaponized metric (deleted posts).

Come on mods STOP hiding up sniping away with deletes. Let's hear your clear and detailed explanation. I don't give 1 fuck if this account gets banned on SPURIOUS grounds. It only serves as an example of how fucked this forum is.  My friends are numerous and horny to take up this torch. You will NEVER silence the truth and the message that double standards here are NOT going to be tolerated.

Permitted flow is so subjective, and the last weapon they have when all others are crushed.

Either the guy is being abused or not , who is abusing him and why is it abuse?? are double standards abuse or not?  I realize these are complex concepts for most here. Plagiarism ?? copying guides to help other with no direct financial gain vs undeniable scamming?? hhmmmmm which to tackle first??

The moderation here and the leverage of the broken gamed metrics it produces are clear and dangerous. Permitted flow needs to be thrashed out and made transparent. Else it is a scam like most things here now.
8  Economy / Reputation / nullius aka noobius non achieving flowery worded non achieving LIAR on: January 02, 2020, 07:00:02 PM
So we have the "famed" (by retards) nullius (suddenly out of retirement did anyone check the password change) making a comeback to find some SPURIOUS case based on some fucktarded logic and some mental gymnastics to give red trust to cryptohunter (whilst admitting he is on thin ice/ thin  line) WHILST IGNORING HIS SCAMMING PALS FAR MORE DANGEROUS ACTIONS.

Some say this account is now held by no other than LAUDA ...guess who is straight there to give the post 20 merits?? HMMM all looks kind of suspect. Let's pull this prick apart and get him on the dirty turds thread to compare this OUTRAGE at CH's REAL ACTIONS in the FULL CONTEXT compared to the clear observable instances of these scamming scumbags undeniable financially motivated wrong doing.

Come here noobius and explain. Cut the flowery over done presentation. We will slice right though that to pull apart your bullshit.

I see nothing in your post history but bunches of conceited crap that if it never existed then nothing would be ANY DIFFERENT AT ALL here.

I see a scammer supporter and self debunking retard that is about to be publicly trashed.

The guy is a fucking moron. He claims CH is out of order for calling out Pharmacist for lecturing others on financially motivated shit posting.... whilst clearly having done this himself under a socky HugeBlackWoman. Don't see CH giving TP any red trust I see him saying STFU that is double standards that is it. That is after TP was attacking CH anyway not like noobius tries to claim.

Then noobius claims this means that CH saying that scammers sitting around here making bingo games and taking the piss out of excuses of peasants ( nullius a self confessed peasant himself that was often hungry and obviously stunted his mental development) for at times only posting helpful guides or their own projects twitter posts on their relevant threads in many cases NOT financially motivated CandP, whilst these scammers are there begging for their own plagiarizing PALS like chibitchity (or whatever that financially motivated plagiarists name is) to be REINSTATED when he admitted it was clearly financially motivated plagiarism... IS OUT OF ORDER , double standards and disgusting. That the board should be taking note that scammers sitting around taking this piss out of peasants for lesser evils (in some cases) should be pointed out for the double standards bullshit it was.

Noobius tries to claim CH is saying plagiarism is okay for poor people. That is TOTAL BULLSHIT. He is saying clearly ...well what we have just said above^^^ I mean he is either trying to deliberately misrepresent CH actions or is too fucking dumb to understand what CH is saying in the full context. Either way fucking retard or fucking scammer supporting piece of shit...we don't really care.

MAKES CH SUPER UNTRUSTWORTHY for making a sensible and clear comparison of clear double standards and how the focus was totally ones sided and selective. LOLOLOLOLOLOL

This fucking idiot nullius is some techno nerd that makes you believe he is super smart because he sits in his mud hut starving with some broken computers from the 90s whilst taking forever posting his flowery sounding crap.

Let him come here and face us and answer our questions fucking scammer supporting little prick. Like he just came back after all this time to dream this up and make himself look super fucking hypocritical and moronic.

As if CH gives one shit about this noobs cucking to lauda et al red trust or 100x red trust what is the fucking difference. The entire feedback system is now and always has been a complete joke. Type 2 and type 3 flags are the only credible warnings. The rest is dangerously misleading garbage that places the honest members in greater danger and serves to enrich the some of the biggest and most dangerous scammers here.

Noobius we are here to demonstrate flowery sounding weasels are NOTHING. We eat those for breakfast. You were best to have stayed far away. The fabled nullius will be crushed wait and see fool.

Anyone not bringing observable instances to support their points are going to be deleted. No more bogus opinions ...bring your corroborating evidence or fuck off.
9  Other / Meta / DT members repeatedly reposting their deleted posts from self moderated threads? on: December 13, 2019, 06:18:16 PM
What is the official board rules about repeatedly reposting your deleted posts from self moderated threads where the thread started is deleting them.

How many times do you have to permit this ? I have people doing this 15 + to  my self moderated threads? and guess what they are DT members.

Can we all start doing this to other peoples self moderated threads or not?

I though you must NOT repost your posts after the self moderator deletes them??


If not that is open season for us all. DT members do not get special rules in all things do they??
10  Other / Meta / members now approve of CHILD SEX ABUSE claims?? Which mod is this??? come here on: December 07, 2019, 05:33:00 PM
This idiot LFC_bitcoin keeps posting some strange accusations of child sex abuse, to which we give a rather measured reply to actually.

GUESS WHAT HAPPENS - EDITED seems it potentially infofront who seemingly does not object to child sex abuse baseless allegation but still does not like those to be rebutted.

Quote from: Bitcoin Forum
A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.


Bobís been mining since about 2011 you spastic. Heís got more bitcoinís than youíve had rapings by your Uncle as a child (which is hundreds).

He doesnít wear a sig & posts in here donít count towards sig campaigns any way.

Well that would be zero laudas feltching clown. Not all families enjoy the same things yours obviously does.

whats up with all the deviant fantasies in this thread. POOR LFC had a terrible childhood it seems. Sad

Boblawblaw thinks it is fun to come attacking us in our threads .... then trust abusing us for telling him to stick on topic, debate the OP or fuck off.

Crying about a bit of blow back hey...

So bitcoin price..., yeah I think 8k is the limit before new year really. How about you guys???

THIS IS THE 2nd time that LFC_bitcoin is going on about child sex abuse. Is this guy seriously messed up???

Donít post for a bit and come back to the usual... TAA why donít you just fuck off if itís so bad here? Your team of one is just so fucking boring now. Did your mother reject you at birth or were you just bullied at school?

It was an artificially inseminated baby, born gender fluid. The anger & bitterness resonates from being born with both male & female reproductive organs.

Its Mother committed suicide due to the shame of having to raise such an abomination of a human being. Its Father was in-prisoned after years of sexually abusing it, it was then put into the care system where it honed its trolling skills & became the master of disaster we now know.


I think that child sex abuse is clearly a level too far even for banter. That kind of thing with children is a blight on bitcoin we need to sever any and all connection to this kind of disgusting behavior. Not have this plastered everywhere. Now I know banter about anything else is widely acceptable by most here and we would not ever bother reporting it (since it would be marked bad anyway) but to leave it there and delete the rebuttal is FUCKED.

edited because it was apparently the topic starter.

11  Other / Meta / 2 sensible suggestions that MAY solve most of the problems with the trust system on: December 05, 2019, 12:46:39 AM
Let's debate these alterations and discuss if they would result in a net positive move. Or if you believe you can demonstrate these ideas would be NET negative when weighing all positives and negatives. Then simply post your civil reply and describe in detail your reasoning.

When implementing control systems it is important to consider not only how well they can reduce the negative behaviors we need reduced, but also what impact on the most important and desirable aspects of a community will they have.  Freedom to freely express your well reasoned views and creating a pleasant and cohesive environment are certainly even MORE important in this type of community even than protecting people against scams.

1. REMOVE the trust score for FEEDBACK - just have it as feedback for the old system. No positive, no negative. Just called feedback. People can still read through it all but there will be no "scores" and DT members will have no greater influence or weight than any other member but make a reference MANDATORY.

The reason being that the old system was undeniably BROKEN and abused. Hence the reason for the new objective flagging system.

Although the old system is clearly no longer useful due to people just using it for their own personal ends, and anything dealing with a REAL FINANCIALLY DANGEROUS persons that you have even a tiny bit of real evidence against.. is now covered by the flagging system ??

The negatives of  leaving it there hamstringing the flagging system are holding this back.

a/ it is still used as a personal weapon with no need to have ANY KIND of hard evidence or real reason to apply red trust with regard to being a clear financial danger.
b/ it crushes free speech (related to later points)
c/ Campaign managers still use it as a tool to remove accountability for their own decisions, and to ensure those dishing out red trust are the only ones that are guaranteed the highest paying sig spots. To punish those that have red tags.
d/ peoples opportunities here are still damaged by this regardless of whether they have done anything wrong at all.
e/ the subjectivity is what causes all the wars, if there was clear undeniable evidence of directly financially dangerous behaviors there would be far less bickering. The vast majority will accept yes we have been busted if there is clear undeniable evidence and leave. That is what the flags are supposed to do.

Further more it is totally illogical boarding on crazy to grandfather in the very trust abuse that was the original driver to develop a new LESS EASILY ABUSED flagging system. I mean the only people that are left with big signs on their account are those that had more NEGATIVES than positives in the old abused system??  that seems completely mad.  It is like saying to people. Yes we see that you are being trust abused. We will develop a system where the abuse is mitigated somewhat. But your abuse will remain grandfathered in forever??

Getting red trust now is clearly saying

We can not demonstrate you have done anything financially damaging to others  (else you would get a flag) but your punishment (no sig campaigns, trading damaged) will remain. Further more now that we have the flagging system we will say that you can give red trust for nearly ANYTHING you like but the punishment will remain the same in terms of sigs and trading etc.

Feedback must just be feedback. No scores no higher weighting for DT but there must be a valid reference. People who feel there COULD be some information that will protect them over what the flagging system can provide can spend time reading the low value nonsense contained in the OLD feedback system.

2. The LEMONS FLAG. The lemons FLAG needs to be tightened up. Sure it can be for NOT-YET-COMMITTED crimes and thought crimes. However there should be a requirement that there is some clear FINANCIAL danger posed directly by the observable actions of the person you are flagging. DIRECT AND OBSERVABLE SIGNS that clearly are reasonably the actions of someone setting up/preparing a scam.

I feel with just those 2 small improvements you will.

Reduce or completely mitigate

a/ it is still used as a personal weapon with no need to have ANY KIND of hard evidence or real reason to apply red trust.
b/ it crushes free speech (related to later points)
c/ Campaign managers still use it as a tool to remove accountability for their own decisions, and to ensure those dishing out red trust are the only ones that are guaranteed the highest paying sig spots.
d/ peoples opportunities here are still damaged by this regardless of whether they have done anything wrong at all.

But the most important points would be that people will not be afraid to say what they like without considering if someone will randomly decide to take away their sig, trading etc.

Easy to spot those that do not provide a reference.

Reduce the fighting and bickering over subjective, low value, and misleading feedback.

The new flagging system was a good idea but it was hamstrung badly by leaving the old trust system there. I mean making the little numbers next to your name slightly less damning if they were based on bogus trust abuse in the old system sounded attractive. However it is clear the old system (that should have been deleted or at least the scoring removed) is still the biggest threat to free speech. In fact it has got worse for free speech than before.

The reason being. We have reduced the requirement from it to be ONLY for directly financially dangerous matters (so now you can be given red trust for almost anything) but the damage of getting it is JUST THE SAME considering most are most terrified of their sigs being removed and the campaign managers still use this weapon.

The very most stupid and very most greedy are ALWAYS going to be victims of ... well themselves.  There is no reason to use them as an argument to provide tools that crush free speech and cause most of the wars over the abuse of subjective and unrealistic mental gymnastics to connect ANY action to a possible financial risk. It is that area specifically that is abused most frequently.

So if you don't understand...

If someone has clearly scammed - there will be little to argue about the observable instances of scamming will be there.  FLAG

If someone is clearly demonstrating they are showing classic signs of setting up a scam. Those will be there and be directly linked to a financial danger. Lemons flag. This flag could be given a bit more visibility than it is now if it was tightened up to be a more reliable indicator for financial danger.

If someone just says something you do not like, or shares an opinion you don't agree with,  but you are unable to demonstrate that is posing a direct financial danger without a lot of mental gymnastics then this is FEEDBACK with no score. People can read this and do their homework before sending their btc to people on the internets. This will most all consist of whining and bickering over small personal battles completely removed from anything that adds any protection or value over the flagging system. However it could be worth reading and researching all the reference links if you see something you directly think is related to a persons inclination to scam you.

12  Other / Meta / Calling for SENSIBLE DEBATE on this use of the trust system ( not regarding us) on: December 04, 2019, 01:54:35 PM
Let's have a sensible civil debate regarding this red trust given to eddie13 today for daring to utter the truth.

eddie13   2019-12-02   Reference   Selectively acts as as your "friendly neighbourhood guy", but those double-faced pricks are the worst. Most of what he does nowadays, he does out of spite.
After being called out for his virtue-signalling several times, he tries to attack here and there with half-baked "legitimate concerns".
I wouldn't trust this user nor his judgement with anything.

The reason for the red is this post.

I forced them to start an escrowed campaign.
they found Lauda as an escrow
Yeah, it should start any day now and that's the very least that I can do.
This could be interpreted as facilitating a scam or at the very least now a conflict of interest..
There is no conflict of interest other than you trying to attack me for calling you out on your bullshit virtue-signalling on everything.

to accept escrowing their campaign
Just because they might in future run a scam-free bounty campaign does not make it a scam-free project because the bounty campaign is directly related to p2pb2b being promoted.

p2pb2b2 have been selective scamming users
There is absolutely no proof of this inasmuch there is no proof of other exchanges doing this. Only half-baked accusations, of which there are plenty for pretty much every exchange.

What's the point of this system if you don't encourage accused parties of resolving their misdeeds or "claimed misdeeds"? Oh right, if someone else was to escrow this you'd keep quiet as always. Roll Eyes

Does this require red trust? I mean I see one undeniably TRUE statement from eddie.

Yes escrowing for a projects bounty ( likely making money from it) will present a conflict of interests when discussing

a/ whether they should be forced to have an escrow ( lauda himself)
b/ escrowing their bounty will not help at all if they are a scam  

So one true statement


eddie also just says hmmmmmmmmmm in response to a reasonable post by jolly good?

For this he gets told he is getting red trust, and further more if he keeps making posts like this (the truth) the red trust will remain??

Before deciding DT members should

1/ review this post and read the thread

2/ look into how that project was "forced" into using escrow ( they amazingly chose laudas escrow)

3/ the clear financial motive for lauda to want to silence eddie13 simply stating truths??

I mean again it seems the trust system is totally being leveraged in a very net negative way. The DT members were all meriting jollygoods discovery and supporting the notion it looks scammy. Now eddie is getting red trust for simply stating some undeniable truths about it??


then tell us if this is a valid use of negative trust and what you are intending to do about it if anything.

To us this is almost up there with using the trust system to punish whistle blowers.  But will be interesting to hear sensible reasoning from other members.

Let's not immediately derail it. Keep on topic and relevant. Let's all try to remain civil too.
13  Economy / Reputation / BobLawblaw - trust abuser, and scammer supporting filth bag. Blacklist it !!!!!! on: December 04, 2019, 12:25:37 PM
It seems now that this disgusting piece of filth

BobLawblaw member of bitcointalk;u=569455

Has started to defend scammers and abusing the trust system by trying to derail threads that bring attention to their clear double standards.

He believes that if you start a thread and present observable instances for open debate that that is cause to give out red trust.

He has previously described himself as

"Maybe I'm just the dumb gay negro in the thread"

He confesses constantly that he has a long history of mental illness and is completely unstable and unsound of mind.

We believe he should be removed from the DT system as quickly as possible. We are reaching new lows here regarding the moronic human waste that is permitted to abuse the trust system.

He does not attempt to debate the points raised in this thread.

He simply lists that thread as reason to give red trust. I mean if you read the thread you will notice he comes to the thread and just starts trying to derail it with some kind of homoerotic fanatasies

This is his first post in response to a sensible debate on defining blackmail and extortion as per DT explanations and behaviors.

Maybe I'm just the dumb gay negro in the thread, but reading this sounds to me like someone dun got F'd in the A too many times, being shady for... reasons... and is now crying about a "woe is me" situation. In my experience with these forums, those that cry the most about the Default Trust system, are those who have shown themselves to be bad actors for this community.

A form of social darwinism. Piss off someone with DT, and you are likely to have more of a bad time. Over enough time, with enough complaints from different users, people can judge the user for themselves by going through grievances. Don't poke the bears you dumbfucks. Be kind to your hosts and stewards.

System is working as intended.

Then claims we should have red trust?  this forums trust system becomes more of a joke daily. He should have red trust for coming to a thread that presents observable instances and immediately derailing with his own homo erotic moronic scammer protecting garbage.

These kinds of trust abuse will only serve as MORE ammunition for ridding this board of the trust system entirely.

Also this TRUST ABUSE was immediately conducted after we thwarted his derailing offtopic sexually deviant attempts to cast doubt on observable instances.


It went directly and supported a FLAG against us. This is clear evidence of the trust system being weaponized on personal grounds and destroys the real value of protecting people financially ( from scammers like his pals).

Any posts that do not bring clear observable instances to corroborate their opinions and are on topic  will be deleted.
14  Other / Meta / CLEAR guide to red trust for EXTORTION and BLACKMAIL according to DT members. on: December 02, 2019, 01:55:38 AM
For those wondering what qualifies as extortion and blackmail according to DT members. I will provide a few handy scenarios.


1. cryptohunter was attacked in his own thread by LAUDA who randomly claimed cryptohunter was a liar. Cryptohunter asks lauda to present the evidence of the LIES. Lauda refuses.

Lauda then comes and repeats the accusations that cryptohunter is a liar. Cryptohunter says produce the evidence of the lies. Lauda refuses and simply states it again. Cryptohunter then says if you call me a liar again without evidence we will encourage people to review your own post history and they will see who is the liar here.

BOOM _ BLACKMAIL/EXTORTION  Lauda gives CH red trust.

DT members agree.


2. cryptohunter presents quotes of laudas post histories where he lied.

Tman comes along and claims cryptohunter  has blackmailed and extorted lauda and gives CH more red trust.

Cryptohunter says to TMAN - you can not give red trust for presenting a facts based post.

Tman replies " I can I will and I just have"


DT members agree.


3. Cryptohunter tells Tman to remove the trust abuse (that he has clearly admitted he has given red trust for a FACTS based post) or else he will be sure to make sure people know this was clearly TRUST ABUSE.

YOGG comes along and BOOM CLAIMS THIS IS BLACKMAIL AND EXTORTION and gives cryptohunter red trust.

Cryptohunter say to yogg this is like someone stealing your phone and you telling them to return it or else you will report them to the police.

Yogg says yes that would be extortion and be wrong.

ALL DT agrees with this and all confirm the red trust is fine and deserving.  Here we see steamtyme ( a tman asslicker) agreeing that ALICE telling bob to return her phone or she will call the cops is BLACKMAIL/EXTORTION

By creating a "tit" for "tat" scenario, Alice can be said to be blackmailing Bob. There is the perceived agreement if you return my property, I will not notify the police. Do something for me and I'll remove the negative consequence of your actions from the table. Now would Alice be punished, charged or sentenced for this - No at least not in my country. Should the police become involved their advice would be to always notify them and file a report even if you've recovered the property.

Rightly so, Alice may not realize that by letting Bob off scott free, she is only setting the predator on a path to the next victim, who may not be so lucky.

NOW WHAT HAPPENS??  start reading here

SCENARIO 4 - the non threatening, non blackmailing, non extortion totally fine and okay way to do things

TMAN comes in and buys a "debt" from LoyceV for 1 satoshi. Then straight away starts threatening to DOXX or seems to be implying in this thread that he will do far more to the " apparent" debtor that dox him. TMan says if this "apparent" debtor does not pay him $650 dollars in a few days he will dox him, and some other threats in PM to him and now seems to be making all kinds of threats.

I mean not only is this clearly financially motivated like his other extortion

It is totally selfish, I mean he is claiming he will release the dox if he does not get HIS 1 satoshi to $650 bucks convertion ... so what he will not turn this information over if he is paid $650?? what about the other fucking people that were " apparently" scammed or not paid out??

That threat started as an attempt at a legal combined effort to get funds back for everyone. Now tman says he will buy all the debts and will extort the guy to paying him back?? actually I forgot...those are not threats, not blackmail and not extortion because it is DT member and different rules apply to them. DOUBLE STANDARDS.

This is BULLSHIT they use the trust system to punish those that whistle blow on their scamming and prior extorting, by claiming you are extorting them LOL then they go around REALLY extorting people for clear selfishly motivated financial gain.

WHAT IS WORSE is the scumbags like steamtyme and the other scammer supporters that have WEASELED their way on to DT with the COMPLIMENTARY CHIPMIXER supporting and colluding with them to fully entrench them on default trust. All enabled, sanctioned and rewarded by the bogus merit=trust system.

So the guide to defining Extortion and blackmail with regards red trust is clear.

You can not say you will encourage people to review a persons post history (who falsely accuses you of lying over and over) to find out the truth about them ..that = EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL

You can not say you will make sure people know the truth that a DT member admitted trust abusing your facts based post if they do not remove that trust abuse = EXTORTION AND BLACKMAIL

You can say you will dox people and PM them other threats unless they pay $650 bucks for something you just bought for 1 satoshi = NOT a threat, NOT extortion nor blackmail.

Or if you get caught making threats unless people pay you money or btc ... you always have the old " under cover agents" get out.
Or if that does not work call in SS for the reverse the meaning of words defense.

More guides will be produces as and when we feel the need to keep the board updated with the latest views and attitudes of our honest and upstanding DT members.

15  Other / Meta / Optimal environment for bitcointalk - Improvements 1. Punishment for False accus on: November 14, 2019, 11:54:01 AM
Improvements 1. Punishment for False accusations of trolling

Since this is a clear rule infraction, apparently punishable by a ban and since there is a clear and sensible definition of trolling " continuously proliferating conclusively debunked and incorrect information as true"  

Since also that it is quite easy to mislead the reader when many "highly merited" and " high trust score" and " high rank" members simply scream trolling to undeniable, independently verifiable observable instances as an attempt to discredit or throw doubt over their validity rather than attempting to debunk these instances ( which of course they realize is impossible).  

Then surely such a blatant and flagrant attempt to mislead and in many cases place in danger the reader should have a punishment.

So certainly in the case where the information and statements are undeniably true ( they relate to specific documented behaviors conducted on this forum and are independently verifiable) are presented and another member states they are TROLLING or in other words claiming these are conclusively debunked and UNTRUE. Then we need to take a more responsible role here in ensuring these people that attempt to prevent the truth by screaming trolling should be punished so that they no longer use this tool of deception.

One should be REQUIRED to present the EXACT and PRECISE piece of information they are referring to as trolling and provide a clear and conclusive debunking of that information. Once they have conclusively debunked that information as false. Then after that point it can be called out as trolling and reported to mods for a punishment.

Any attempts to discredit central points other than public and fair debate should be prevented. It is clearly sub optimal and in many serious cases dangerous to the reader.

Perhaps a 6 month signature ban for any person that tries to discredit observable instances as trolling would be a sensible start. If you want to claim a person is trolling (in relation to behaviors/instances documented in black and white on this forum) you must be able to conclusively debunk the information you specifically call out as trolling.

This would need to be a CONCLUSIVE and undeniable debunking. An observable instance can never meet the sensible criteria of trolling it is impossible. It could be off topic or irrelevant ( that would need to be considered) but it can never be called be termed as trolling. Certain members need to be taught that screaming trolling in response to undeniable independently verifiable observable instances is not acceptable and is indeed deceptive and in many cases deliberately so.

16  Economy / Reputation / REE The-One-Above-All Mentally sick spammer - LOOK AT THEM RUNNING AWAY.....haha on: October 08, 2019, 04:00:15 PM
So after undeniable scammers and scam supporters featured here in the dirty turds thread

Started a thread here

Now you immediately notice on their thread the claims of TROLLING and HYPERTROLLING soon start to dominate.

Witness how our DT dirt turds thread goes.

TOAA = These are dirty turds here are the undeniable observable events of them involved in scamming, willingly facilitating scams, trust abusing and supporting scammers.
DT'S = Troliing
TOAA = Please present the trolling or incorrect parts that you can debunk in public. Should not be difficult because it is all based on observable instances on this very board.
DT's = Trolling
TOAA = So you do not deny any of the observable instances are true but you say they are trolling?
DT's = We can not demonstrate it is untrue, because it is undeniable but it is still trolling.
TOAA = How can it be trolling if it is true and merely a collection of observable instances from your past here?
DT's = Trolling still we will derail it instead

Now witness their claims of trolling and mental illness thread

DT's = Trolling and mentally ill - constantly  trolling us on our past scamming, scam facilitating, trust abuse and how the systems of control function
TOAA = Please present the examples of those central points you have debunked and that are trolling
DT's = stop trolling us
TOAA = Just present the debunked information we are spreading about those matters so we can see what you mean.
DT's = NO we will not, please stop trolling
TOAA = So you can not debunk any of our central points?
DT's = I think he should be banned , yeah me too, yeah let's hope he does get banned.
TOAA = Why should any person get banned for presenting the truth when it is on topic and relevant and is protecting other members or defending against false claims?
DT's = See hyper trolling now HYPER TROLL
TOAA = So you can't debunk any of our central points can you, and you must feel silly just screaming trolling as your only faux defence?
DT's = Lock this topic please this guy is clearly insane and will not stop trolling us. Let's lock it to save the board from more of his trolling.

quick lock it, he is asking us over and over to present examples of his central points we have debunked..... that is not going to look good because we can not debunk any and there is no trolling,....lock it now.



Stop embarrassing yourselves. You have NO ANSWER to the observable instances we have. You are scammers or scammer supporters. That is all there is too it. Accept and embrace your new titles as DIRTY TURDS.

By trying to convince others that the truth about your pasts is TROLLING, you are untrustworthy and should ALL be removed from any positions of trust or influence at once.
By crying and screaming to have someone banned because you want your past dirty deeds to remain hidden, whilst you go around punishing other members for lesser evils, and use that as some reason that only YOU GUYS are trustworthy enough to get on the HIGHEST PAYING SIG SPOTS, you are totally making a mockery of bitcoin and this movement.

Theymos get them off ffs.
17  Economy / Reputation / Should DT1 members be editing their histories to mask their prior wrong doing??? on: October 05, 2019, 07:45:20 PM
If a DT1 member starts EDITING the titles of their threads and posts histories to mask and obscure their prior financially motivated wrong doing should this be ALLOWED??

Does this look shady or PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE???

Editing a posts from several years back just recently AFTER it has been brought to light is incredibly shady.


Who thinks this is totally acceptable behavior?? We can't wait to see all the explanations given as to WHY IT IS TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE haha. Bring them here.

It should remain as it were before you were made ashamed of it as a reminder to other members of who you really are.

LoyceV do you not have this entire forum backed up and can find the ORIGINAL unedited posts ?

I mean the excuse for changing it ( in place of the original text) is quite amusing.
18  Economy / Reputation / Nutildah -willing to facilitate scammers for around 300bucks?? deleting evidence on: October 05, 2019, 07:37:23 PM

Nutildah has edited the post where he had put his account for sale for 0.3 BCT

How shady is that?HuhHuhHuh?

Come on loyceV where is the original unedited post??


Anyone ELSE (because loyce V will likely be too busy to help) have that thread archived??

Put that thread back to its ORIGINAL FORM you sneaky scum bag.


just to see how this is determined and willing scam facilitating for a price, if you are that certain selling an account is helping scammers and is evil and then still decide to sell your own account for a price, then you are certainly not trustworthy.
19  Other / Meta / Sig campaign mangers - now help advertising for scammers - TO PROTECT THE BOARD. on: October 02, 2019, 03:45:51 PM
I know what. Instead of NOT helping promote SCAMS at all,  and pushing to have them banned from advertising ?

We will cash in whilst promoting scams and their projects but make sure only those we class as spammers don't promote them, so we protect the board (and get paid)??
Yeah, so if the posts are good and the members promoting the scams are not immediately recognizable as scoundrels, then the newbies are more likely to get scammed haha BRILLIANT.
Scams must only be promoted by the " good posters".


I've heard it all now. It keeps getting BETTER.

So rather than just ban any skank that promotes scams, we will cash in, pretending to only help promote scams via posters we consider not to be spamming.

This argument is BOGUS and again demonstrates how fucked this board is now.

SUCHMOON has previously given scam tags to people for advertising POSSIBLE SCAMS and says that is HOW IT SHOULD BE.

Now though, if it is a DT that may have some juicy sig campaign btc dust for her in future, there seems no need to worry about those promoting and advertising scams at all. OH REALLY??
So she must believe now that if you make good posts you can promote scams. Just don't spam at the same time?


Hhampuz quick back to livecoin. I mean as the argument goes " would you rather live coin gets some irresponsible campaign manager or just let hhampuz get paid to make sure the evil "spammers" don't get to advertise them or though he may well allow proven scammers and the financially dangerous to advertise the " scams".

Proven SCAMS don't get promoted RIGHT? anyone promoting them get SCAM TAGS??  why don't we run with that one?  

Can someone explain this to us all again?

So ++

1. if DT says you are promoting a possible scam you get a scam tag
2. if  a campaign manager says you are an okay poster you can promote scams that are paying them ? and dt don't do shit because they may need to get on those campaigns managed by said campaign manager
3. If you mention this truth you may get a scam tag

Just more twilight zone morality in action.

Suchmoon what happened to promoting " possible scams and scammers" makes you immediately game for a scam tag? or has that changed now?

Now you are spamming a sig are you worried sticking to this could void your 7 bucks a pop posting in future if you fall out with campaign managers? is this a conflict of interests?

Get promoting scams guys, just get a campaign manager that controls DT's income to manage your scam and you are golden.

When are we getting the twilight zone music auto load in when you come to meta?

Should campaign managers that willingly assists the promotion of proven scammers or scams be given

a/ more merits
b/ more trust
c/ a shiny new badge
d/a warning and then a scam tag if they do it again.

20  Other / Meta / Merit stats board? let's have a dedicated sub forum for this garbage? on: September 28, 2019, 01:08:40 PM
Meta is now 90% raw stats output?  loyceV and trannydung and their merit obsession is clogging up the entire front page of meta board.

Let's give these members their own sub board. So those that are interested in reading some meaning into a metric that is totally subjective, gamed for financial reward and other magical bullying powers can then go to that board and not have to be annoyed by the odd thread that is not stats puke?

Since they are unable to contain themselves to one thread each ie

Loyces merit stats puke thread

Trannydungs merit stats puke thread

and need to make a ton of new threads all that are simply merit stats puke?

Let's either rename this board to merit discussion or give these fools their own board to destroy with this garbage.

Far more interesting and valuable threads are pushed off page one to make way for MORE RAW MERIT STATS PUKE.

How much analysis can be given to  subjective gamed meaningless metric like merit?

If you want to keep pumping out new merit stats then just make one thread about it and keep updating that thread. Use the OP as a little guide to jump to all the other meaningless obsession over the raw merit data given out on the basis of errr??? well no basis at all that anyone can drill down on to make any use of it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!