Marlboroza the alt of zorrobeck? The scammer supporter? I don't think listen to a scammer supporter like this one.
I wonder anyone looked at their prior trust lists before they went blank?
Were marlboroza and zorrobeck his alt ever ...
Zorrobeck has no alts. You'll have to do better than that.  Wrong. These are all my accounts of course, and so are you.  |
|
|
|
2 PMs explaining I not willing to engage in similar beheviour again and with my reasons to get stuck into it back then. And I am harrsing a person who finds fun in getting hands on others personal info, classic.
Yet that doesn't change the fact that most of your flags are baseless and indicate no possible high risks. Asking for opposition from who can judge it without double standards unlike you.
Bullshit. 2 PMs whining i.e. lying how you are going to behave, which I declined after which you started attacking and harassing me. You are the very definition of a degenerate evil individual. Never should you attack the person you asked help from just because they did not provide you help. You are not entitled to my good side. |
|
|
|
While these answers have substances, they are all wrong i.e. do not explain what is going on. The time between blocks follows the Exponential distribution, the number of blocks in an interval follows the Poisson distribution (Poisson distribution can be derived from an Exponential or Binomial distribution) — with the expected time being 10 minutes, and the variance being 100 minutes. During the times when the next block would be confirmed in over 1 hour, i could still see over 40K unconfirmed transactions. What causes this lag at times?
1 hour blocks have very little to do with the hashrate unless there is a temporary collapse in the hashrate (very unlikely and infrequent, but 1 hour blocks are not that infrequent in comparison). They have some influence, as in a strong decrease in the hashrate at the "right time" could cause the 100 minute variation to be even higher (but this happens very infrequently).
End thread. |
|
|
|
As long as you are not affiliate with me, nutildah and similar this should end well.  I can assure everyone that I have no join venture with anyone yet LOL. However I am open to work with the users who love cricket and have unconditional love for bitcoin :-D You do not need a joint venture, you need to add some of such users into your trust list or get added to A concerned neighbourhood cat's trust list and you automatically get upgraded to rank "Scam enabler or scam facilitator". Maybe thermos should give us custom titles. |
|
|
|
Where is the theymos vs. Lauda ordeal from 2019? That was semi-private but still quite the scandal. |
|
|
|
Have you had some red trust expunged from your account?
If so by who?
Can you specify please? I can not recall any red tag from any serious user on my account or removed in recent time. By the way, it's Royse777 As long as you are not affiliate with me, nutildah and similar this should end well. |
|
|
|
Requesting opposition for the unwarrant flag by Lauda, due to me not actively involved in the accusations made in the linked thread and not having any history of anyone being at high risk of losing money with me. I even think it is not a proper use of flag. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1412The following statement is an unbased lie and I request more support for the flag. Funny how most of the people opposing it are primarily doing it out of spite towards me, not relevant to your flag or you.  You have an history of creating shitty flags out there. Go through yourself. Edit : Funny how most of the people supporting it are primarily doing it out of spite towards me and due to me speaking about your double standards and abuse, not a relevant flag at first place. Stop lying and harassing me because I rejected your PM sob stories. |
|
|
|
ifinta please do not make consecutive posts that is against the forum rules! I belive in creativity.IOTA is SURE an ISSUE at big firms. Only a big firm (or a state, or states, ...) is able to support IOTA with such big amounts of liquid money ( 1 000 000 000 USD or monthly 50 M USD salary for a team... In a good homebrew project it isn't a need ). But to scam others with such possibilities, with such power - I find it terrible... No big firm would reasonably want to do something with IOTA, but it is not impossible that the IOTA team fraudulently misrepresents itself up until the point that the firm goes for it at first. This would not last given that I, among pretty much anyone else, can contact such firms. Reference: you are a corrosive Troll, so do not chirp about etiquette here!
go enlightening noobs about the dangers of cryptocurrencies elsewhere, silly little scam hunter
|
|
|
|
Supported & tagged. These bumping services are getting on my nerves now..... It is a big problem and a lot of people get financially harmed by this.  |
|
|
|
Voting with alts should not be allowed. At the very least users who want to have trust lists on their alt accounts should ask theymos to have those accounts to be blacklisted from voting. The trust system allows you to vote for each DT1 candidate once. Bypassing that restriction with multiple accounts is not acceptable regardless of how you feel about the person bringing this up.
This would be a beneficial improvement. I wonder why it is not the case. |
|
|
|
Requesting opposition for the unwarrant flag by Lauda, due to me not actively involved in the accusations made in the linked thread and not having any history of anyone being at high risk of losing money with me. I even think it is not a proper use of flag. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1412The following statement is an unbased lie and I request more support for the flag. Funny how most of the people opposing it are primarily doing it out of spite towards me, not relevant to your flag or you. |
|
|
|
I think, no man will be support IOTA more, if this fund not more able to back the big big and expensive team - and the development not producing a REAL DLT product.
After a such event - I think - it will be a need to replace IOTA in big projects at big firms... They won't wants drop the projects, sure. They take an another WORKING and WELL TESTED DLT projekt, and they will replace IOTA!
We will see - sure - what will happens. I think it will come earlier a such event as this year ends.
This is correct. First of all IOTA will never produce a decentralized solution the one that they have promised day one. This is a very difficult challenge to solve, and their people are not competent to say the least (ignoring the fact that their ethics are also backwards and no sane real cryptographer that has heard of how they behave will want to work with them). Second, the belief that IOTA (assuming they implemented a real DLT) will be used in companies is one of the biggest and most absurd bagholder dreams that I have heard of. Even if the technology was excellent, companies would fork IOTA and tell the original team to go away and play with their kid toys and let them produce more broken cryptography such as their homebrew hash.
Full scam information can be found here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5227016.0. |
|
|
|
I'm not 100% convinced that Cleobet and 1xbit arr related. But this story definitely doesn't looks good and I'm not going to use this website, unless they will prove that this accusation is wrong. Cleobet deny accusation, but I see lack of transparency in their answers and there is no facts in their words which would prove that they are legitimate. Copying design, layout, colors and other stuff from 1xbit looks bad, no matter what was reason why they did this.
Not even their license is proper, what else do you need? So, I don't say that they are legitimate or something. But I don't know much about licenses of gambling websites, so, what's exactly wrong with their license? Read the thread from the beginning to end, including all pictures. The license number listed is not theirs. Until corrected, you can assume their license does not exist. I think you might want to visit your ophthalmologist. efialtis, tyKiwanuka, Rikafip, Lauda are the same person. (or working together)
I am going to add efialtis, tyKiwanuka and Rikafip to list of my alt accounts. Hello me, and hello to other mes too! |
|
|
|
YES. Very big scam. Many victims. Sure. IOTA is a complete scam, your inadequate knowledge for assessing this does not excuse its practices. |
|
|
|
So many good people got throw out of DT1 to welcome so many bad people in DT2. Saddening.  Thanks for the update! |
|
|
|
Merit Abuse:An inactive Legendary member named Jayjay04 suspiciously gave pacman7331 a staggering 50 Merits for this post though the pictures he posted there are no longer available to see. This member is definitely involved or a compromised account. Why is he not in the two lists of accounts? I did not want to include Jayjay04 in any of those connected links because I thought it would open up a separate topic which came to my mind after seeing its connection to a couple of other compromised accounts such as willdono, ferry168, Grahnite. Whoever was behind all of those hacking was also behind Ferry168 which is a tagged and abandoned account for being involvement with compromising Elwar's account on 17th July, 2018. Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4708873.msg42558978#msg42558978That makes sense. Please do make a thread when you are ready and we will neg. rate and flag the whole group. Supported! |
|
|
|
Come on guys, if you want to work together trying to take Cleobet.io out, do it less suspicious.
Now it is only visible that this is a coordinated action from efialtis.
You have it all figured out. Big brain. |
|
|
|
On the other hand, identifying alts with connection of addresses can go wrong also. For example, I have not participated in Mb8coin bounty but I have purchased some from bounty hunters before listing. Now, if I had participated in the bounty and received coins from them too in the same address, would you call me bounty cheater? Not necessarily but that's the truth. Connected in address = Bounty cheater which sometimes is not the case. Posting an address should not be the only case to call someone bounty cheater but that can be one of some other criteria.
Stop sig. spam posting. I have answered the same together with Royse777. How long do you think it will be before people start framing each other by posting addresses that are not theirs?
I believe such cases must have already happened. This is less of a problem than you think. If somebody enters some shitcoin bounty with my address, is anybody reasonable going to believe it was me? [1] The same goes for you and others. Most affected members would be other bounty spammers, sig. spammers on various levels. Behavioural analyses makes this less of a problem. True, they are going to post an address that they control to get the coin. But if they don't really care about the airdrop (or whatever) they can just use an alt account to post the address of someone they don't like and both accounts are banned.
For this reason we can not say for sure that two or more accounts are connected just because same address posted from those accounts or someone quoted someone else's post which looks they were following up some comments. I have already seen few cases and my standing was pretty much looking to where these ends. In >95% of the cases that people were connected this way, they were actually connected. Are you saying such rates of accuracy are inadequate?
[1] There was a case where a long time ago where Yahoo asked me linking me to some spreadsheet, I had no idea what the project was nor did I enter its airdrop. How is it a hard call if it was almost always correct  This does not make sense to me. You should exercise caution when evaluating, but you should also keep in mind its correctness. The average user being caught this was has no idea what they are doing let alone ways of evading. I said earlier that I have not done the math yet so I can not come to a conclusion. I am also not invalidating your point of judgement. If my memory is not too bad then I have seen few cases where I could not make a clear call. Correct, but I am talking about cases where we were really wrong in the end (this is a subset of the set of all the times we were wrong because this includes cases that we do not know about). Sometimes they are inconclusive sure, but I would not doubt its superb accuracy (is far from perfect, but no tool is perfect). We make use of what little we are given here.  |
|
|
|
Have you guys noticed more and more newbie and/or very low rankend users are entering discussions in those ANNs of new bookies?
I am still confident that the flag is justified - not to mention the unprofessional behaviour they are showing...
But... what about all those accounts mentioned previously - still having a hard time figuring this out...
I would assume any new casino that is showing just some red flags (e.g. copied design, or copied ToS) warrants a flag because it is high-risk until proven otherwise. |
|
|
|
That purported message from the forum is strange as fuck... I never heard of that kind of thing, especially the ability to measure "units of evil" and evil can be atoned by paying a fee? The phraseology, and the fun of the language just makes it seem like it is either a joke or just scammy weird.... I mean not very professional.
The message is completely normal and units of evil has been a implemented deterrent for as long as I can remember. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
