Suits better in B&H as more newbies could nominate themselves or there "ranking up colleagues". Even nominating ourselves is allowed, hence can garb more traffic in sections where newbies roam around more often.

I would say NO to changing username feature on the forum, as it makes the forum world more harder to be friendly and identifiable to everyone. Even makes the overall experience on the forum confusing to many.

I think a general perspective of freedom of speech is what we are trying to protect here. For me it has just one meaning, that someone's right to express his opinions should not be hampered even if they are biased. I don't see it dedicated to any nation on the forum, as it's more international.

Anyways, you can't ban opinions and specific types of thinking from the forum, they would just come back or evolve somewhere else.

Yes, anyways you are going to build hell lot of profits out of using the same info 3 times in 3 different projects to the investor's. Only someone with his balls in his head would trust you.

It is a pure scam attempt.

I am happy I don't seem as qualified as you to not understand the simple intend of using the flag system here. Get your frivolous flags off it is misuse of the system.



Nice, I atleast dragged something real out of you. Nice shades of darks you indicate in your creepy racist and low value thinking.

Still, there stupidity would not be that public and accessible as it is now. And what about freedom of speech ?

Is it a good suggestion to delete the flags started by the banned members ?

I will show how it relates.

The-Devil getting banned soon as per the accusations here = All his fake flags getting deleted.

This would fulfil the overall purpose of an boycott from the community, and reduce the heck of opposing all of them.

That is really pretty LAME from an news crypto channel which says they want to provide fair covarage of the cryptocurrency industry on their website about page.

I think such attacking and openly blackmailing should not be an expected criteria for DT1 atleast.

There is not any proof get lost text spinner.

If this happens on larger scale later in the future, I don't think it would be notified or handled always. Even opposing that number of abusive flags is not always handy. Only theymos could handle this at light speed and he should now.

_{Btw, the thread title changing trick make it more confusing, please stop.}

Did someone thought about the effect of this username changes on the other users trust lists who have included or excluded them ? Like trust list is organised by using the usernames of the accounts and not UID so even after username change the UID remains same and only the username would be changed. Most of the user's trust list would be up with one of the old username and all gets messed up.

---

Anyways, the account registered by @asu under micgoossens username is autobanned by some logical mod around. I don't think you need to worry about it again El duderino_. Enjoy your privacy !

Not defending him, just not supporting wrong use of something which is setup to be used abided by some rules for the betterment. I can't act like you making my own rules here, it would look bad on me.

OP didn't asked TMAN to give merits to him or put on some highly intelligent trap to gain those merits hence not deceptive.


Hopefully, I am not.

Thanks for pointing, I was bit dump while supporting it but I too think that it is not an proper use of flag system. Deleted my opinion on the flag.

The Roach guy is claimed to be the biggest troll on bitcointalk by most of the guys with caps around, hence he is in the middle, if I understand this morden art.

There representative account here was last online on December 26, 2019.

Can't say when they will be back but it should be happened quick.

I think announcing the registration here is a good move overall and we could always track the activity if needed and act accordingly. Or he could just give the accounts details to micgoossens, oo sorry' El duderino_ and he can change it later. But even after all this I don't think @asu would use this accounts for any trivial benifits.

Ignoring burden of proof on the accuser is just like operating with double standards and hidden agendas in one way. So no it not good for anybody, not just DTs.

In legal terms, yes burden of proof is on the accuser.


Source: Wikipedia: Burden of proof (law)

On Bitcointalk,

I don't think so is the case always, some people with higher powers on DT tend to ignore this.