What cannot be denied is there is no sense of urgency when it comes to the OP because he has not logged in since creating the thread. If he had any genuine interest in anything he wrote he would have been active.

I would consider the OP as someone who is doing this (posting in the forum) for attention to be noticed rather than there being an actual need. Well, he has been noticed and nothing positive can be attributed to him.

Regardless of percentages and numbers being involved it is wise to take in to account the post history and feedback of the OP, then things will become even clearer. I think the issues you raised of verification and taxation are secondary when it comes to the actual person behind the one proposing the so-called service in the first place.

When you wrote rinse and repeat, what immediately came to my mind regarding the Reputation board were the number of members making new threads about receiving a neutral tag and then as a result of it their alt-accounts were uncovered after members dug deeper.

There are similar rinse and repeat cases in Meta where members created threads using new accounts asking for their bans to be overturned. I cannot recall a single ban thread that I read deserved to be overturned. One disastrous move by the moderators was to revoke the ban on naim027 and that led to more problems with conduct around the forum. That might be a case of when rinse and repeat worked.

The OP created this thread on 12th June 2023 and was last active on 28th June 2023. If he is not interested in posting here with responses why are members continuing to post here? It seems the thread was created to vent frustration at having negative trust on his Thule account therefore it would be a consideration for a moderator to lock the thread as it really does serve zero purpose.

Well, the deadsea33 account has not received a negative tag but you are right he thought he was clever to create a topic about the neutral tag that hugeblack left for him. Maybe he was confident some members would come to his defence because of the threads he created to giveaway merits and build his account but that did not happen.

In the end, it was just a neutral tag therefore he had no need to create this thread. I am sure he has other accounts he is using for signature campaigns therefore he will try to be more careful when using them.

I have to say it was inevitable, the exchange had to close down but only after a scam. I am surprised scammer TillKoeln kept the website active for that number of years. I thought he would have exit-scammed after the fake Dogecoin hack drama but he kept the website running.

How many days has it been the unnamed.exchange website has been down? What is scammer TillKoeln up to now?

If you want to access to the cpanel of someone else and you have a list of websites that you want access to, that is probably going to be a criminal offence in every country around the world.

Can you elaborate when you say "no illegal thing included" what does that mean because if you are proposing to hack in to a website you are proposing to carry out an illegal act.

You will not find anybody in the forum who will be a partner to criminal activity such as what you are proposing therefore you should refrain making such posts in future.

As the question seems to be directed for the OP he should answer it because he is very well placed. After all, it has been 3 years since he created his logomaker account therefore if he were to shed some light on the demand (or lack of) for logos it would be a helpful statistic.

If he were to share the number of sales he had completed during the time he has created his account it might go towards answering your question.

So this is what it has come down to again. If the trolling and the constant flooding of this thread with consecutive posts minutes apart both from the stormbounty account and the CryptoHFs account is not enough, the mention of religion and profanities have become their chosen choice of expression.

The stormbounty account and the CryptoHFs account are on my trust exclusion and will probably be added to my ignore list too.

Going by what Duelbits have written they have basically released the funds even though they suspect there is abuse. The reason seems to be because the funds are what they deem to be insignificant. Having said that, Duelbits took this step even though Casino Guru closed the complaint because of lack of co-operation by the OP.



-----------------------



If Duelbits suspected abuse I think it would have been better for them to have fully investigated the matter rather than not because of the small amount of money involved because the player accepted various terms and conditions when he signed up to their website.

What is the real relationship between the CryptoHFs and stormbounty account? Yes it has been noticed by more than one member.

The fact you are constantly posting in this thread points to you having an ulterior motive. What I do not understand is that of you use your personal text to write Whirlwind cannot be trusted, what you are doing posting in the Whirlwind thread?

I would ask how someone such as a newbie account created a few months ago is going that deep in to the historical issues of the forum and is more aware about the political ongoings of the forum rather than of Bitcoin itself (as his posts indicate).

Though it is not necessarily an indication of guilt, you would expect the one operating the account to be more active in defending his position if the accusation is false. I am looking forward to reading what they have to say if they return the forum.

I understood that part because you were talking in a generic sense.

If it took that incident of the 0.3 BTC to re-evaluate forum trust then it seems you learned the hard way and I am sorry for your loss. Having said that your tag should have been sufficient enough to ensure he was unable to scam anyone again therefore through you loss if you managed to protect others at least something positive came from the event.

Whether it was peer pressure or something else, I think things have changed since those days. People seem to be far more vocal about tagging accounts and it could be because of the amount of money involved with signature campaigns at the current BTC/USD rate.

Nowadays not only are the tagged accounts creating threads to draw attention to themselves, there are forum members with grudges getting involved in the hope of aggravating the situation (as a result of their vindictive nature) and most of this over neutral not negative tags.

In many cases the green trusted accounts are the most dangerous because if they are traded there is a possibility they will ask for a loan with the intention of defaulting. To make matter worse, maybe they will take a series of small to medium sized loans and replay them only to then take multiple loans from multiple sources only to default.

Yes I do. I doubt an account seller would make a post in the Reputation board announcing the sale because if that were the case it would leave the account almost useless.

Keeping all this in mind it is somewhat sad that the community has been unable to find a solution that is widely acceptable. Some are genuinely searching for a solution seeking consensus therefore I hope we find it.

As the other member stated, you should contact the Duelbits forum representative to raise your concerns.

What I can say is that he has been active in the forum recently and has posted in a different thread related to Duelbits. Hopefully he will see this thread and post here but you should send a PM to inform him about the thread.

I checked the thread and saw nothing to be getting excited about. Whatever the OP is trying to achieve in that thread it seems something completely to Whirlwind has achieved and is trying to achieve. If I read the format correctly, there are no similarities between Whirlwind and that ETH mixer.

The main point I noted apart from the OP is looking for investment, it is not a case of where people can send funds in one crypto and receive them in a different crypto after mixing.

There has been some feedback regarding this where the viability of adding options such as ETH and XMR has been called in to question. If Whirlwind are going to push ahead with beta and then roll out the option, the dynamics of the service changes from exclusively a Bitcoin mixer to a mixer and exchange therefore this could be a first.

Any form of innovation in the crypto sphere is welcomed. We will be in a position to comment after the service is rolled out but if it helps with growth it probably will be accepted by the community.

On the contrary it is obvious you do otherwise you would not have been vocal to this extent. 

Poker Player has a right to his opinion about you posting in similar fashion to naim027 and to my knowledge he is not DT therefore where is the problem? He could not come to that conclusion blindly, he obviously spotted similarities therefore he gave his opinion and I still have not gone through all your post history but from what I have seen I can understand why Poker Player mentioned similarities your Learn Bitcoin account has with naim027.

Are you now advocating censoring comments?

If this is true, I would like to know who this DT member is. Post a link.

In the end the problem is that people are opinionated and they want to express views. Until or unless there is either a different mechanism added to this forum or an overwhelming majority consensus (or intervention from theymos), this debate will continue.

There is now a trend where members create threads to question neutral tags, it is unnecessary and brings more attention to themselves. Having said that there is a huge distinction between a neutral and negative tag and the one place placing the tag has a right to exercise their opinion based on how they interpret the evidence they have access to.

I am fairly confident he will return here to post, I am expecting it. Without a shadow of doubt the priority for the current owner/operator of the account seems to be the signature campaign participation therefore I would not be surprised if he returned to post some incoherent ramblings while saying he has no case to answer.

You obviously have issues with DT members which go beyond the story you have presented here. I had your name added to a list of users that were going to have their post history looked at sometime this week and an appropriate tag would be have been left if it was warranted. Having said that, the post from you today (and my reply to it) will not prejudice the outcome.

If you do not know what the exact reason was should you really be singling it out for scrutiny? It will not take you long to read through his post history or the threads that member has been making a nuisance of himself in, maybe then you will be in a better position to know what the exact reason was and then cite it. No, I put it to you that you know exactly what happened.

If you are that inclined to write about it here as a comment, why did you not write to the members that distrusted you to ask why they did it? I think you are trying portray yourself as someone who does not know what is going on and that portrayal really defeats the object because you are clearly the opposite.

That is usually an argument deliberately put forward by members as a smokescreen for their own failures. You (and every other member) can claim to have been making quality posts and that is simply subjective therefore that debate is not worth having. If you say one thing another does not have to agree.

Stand by your conviction or withdraw the allegation. Make a list of the threads where any arguments took place and mention the names of any members that received neutral and/or negative tags from any DT directly as a result of arguing with a DT members. Let us see which tags are unjustified.

Post a link, where did they write it?

Again, stand by your conviction or withdraw the comment. Make a list of when these alleged incidents happened and include names so we can go through them one at a time.

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



I broadly agree with hugeblack in the comments he left on your feedback. I do not believe the story that you gave for deleting the post history.

After reading through the thread I also have left you a neutral tag but it was very close to being a red tag (and could yet end up becoming negative trust after I further investigate especially the highly questionable ratio of merits sent and received between this deadsea33 account and a couple of others): https://bpip.org/Profile?id=106374

In future if hugeblack does remove his neutral tag, I will not remove mine unless there are exceptional circumstances and I just cannot see those happening. As for nefarious conduct including merit abuse, if that is confirmed you will receive a negative tag and if given for those reasons that also will probably not be removed unless exceptional circumstances. I will check your account history in more detail when I have time.

You should change the subject title of the thread because hugeblack did not make false accusation against you.