Hmm...
There is an option c here.
This might not be as black and white as people suspect.
But good thread for popped corn.
Option C would be that Inaba photoshopped the Werner post. He then forced Garr255 under threat of canceling the order to admit that he is Werner, even though he (Garr255) is not. Garr255 confesses under duress, not knowing that the Werner account makes him look like he's bid-shilling. If option C actually happened, Inaba should quit BFL and work for the CIA. Rampion already nailed this one as bullshit. Anyone with integrity would not bow to false blackmail just to "protect" some investors. In fact, it would allow him to give an excuse to investors that is out of his control. |
|
|
|
|
Why does Maged even post here with speculation at all, when all Theymos needs to do is check the post edit history? Hell, it's probably already been broadcast across RSS when he made the first post. I'm dumbfounded as to personal opinion, speculation and accusations need to enter something so seemingly cut and dry. Is it because Garr255 is a friend of Maged and he's trying to protect him? It certainly can't be that Maged thinks BFL and Inaba are dishonest, as he wouldn't have accepted payment from funds paid by BFL to false advertise here. Maybe it's all fake resistance to make it appear that the mods are objective of Inaba and not just on his payroll now.
Check the logs, Theymos, and we don't want to hear you say "oh well when matthew was misleading it was serious, but when Garr did it it was obviously a prank". /thread
|
|
|
|
In the PM system, posts have not been replaced with activity yet. Is this intended?
Nice catch. |
|
|
|
The mods do not need to remote control someone's computer or look at ELA of screenshots, theymos needs to just simply look for the deleted post.
Seriously, please investigate, there should be consequences for shill bidding or faking screenshots.
I thought Garr255 was a trusted member, after all he holds 250 BTC of the forum money... I hope the Werner account was never used by him (best to check past posts' IP/IP ranges and headers of both accounts (assuming he forgot to use a VPN at least once) if deleted posts do not provide enough information). As for the victims coming forward - have they been notified of this thread / do they browse all sections often enough to stumble on one of the threads where posts with accusations against Garr255 are located? Being a "trusted" or "untrustworthy" member simply means that Theymos, a 21 year old who has various flaws and gaping holes in his own ethics, deemed it as such. (e.g. meritless) |
|
|
|
On one hand, that's a ridiculous assumption as googling "ugly Australian girl" shows the other side of that. On the other hand... |
|
|
|
korean sugrey
so no for me
i like chinese and japanes girls
lol. Can't tell if serious. I would say the amount of surgeries ranked as follows (in severity and quantity). #1: China #2: Korea #3: Japan The obsession and amount of makeup used would be: #1: Japan #2: Korea #3: China |
|
|
|
I had this debate many times in the past 9 years here in Korea. With each and every occurrence, I am shown more evidence that every country has ugly and beautiful women and it really is a matter of personal taste, one that adapts over time and influence I might add. TL;DR? How could you possibly think the above statements were too long to read. Idiot. I'd say Sweden and Japan are easily at the top.
I remember thinking Japanese women were all pretty back when I only knew of AV idols. My opinion changed right after stepping off the plane to Japan. You didn't have your faith renewed walking around in Shibuya or Harajuku though? Lots of good looking girls. And wouldn't you agree that most Korean girls all try to conform to a similar Korean ideal standard? You'll know better than me of course since you live there. I've just formed my opinion based on spending some time in Seoul(Myeong-dong mostly) and through Korean media. First and foremost, the conformity is unattractive to me. Second, the plastic surgery patients and makeup queens of a single city do not reflect the greater population of the entire country in my eyes. Here is what those "Myeongdong girls" look like, and it's always makeup and surgery (which grosses me out). They are an embarrassment to their race and country with each and every repeated nose job.       Pro-tip: Koreans actually think this is attractive (powder caked white faces and all!) Lastly, I have always been attracted to natural beauty and even plead with any girlfriend of mine not to wear makeup whenever possible. There are many gorgeous girls in Korea, Japan, Sweden, Australia, England, America, China, Switzerland, Germany, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if there were even some pretty girls in New Jersey*. *Okay, maybe that's going a little too far. |
|
|
|
That moment in life where Mathew N. Wright calls Trade Fortress an idiot. You know, that moment right before you but Mathew on ignore. Yeah, that one.  I have a confession to make. I laugh out loud every time someone attempts to insult me while spelling my name wrong. |
|
|
|
I had this debate many times in the past 9 years here in Korea. With each and every occurrence, I am shown more evidence that every country has ugly and beautiful women and it really is a matter of personal taste, one that adapts over time and influence I might add. TL;DR? How could you possibly think the above statements were too long to read. Idiot. I'd say Sweden and Japan are easily at the top.
I remember thinking Japanese women were all pretty back when I only knew of AV idols. My opinion changed right after stepping off the plane to Japan. |
|
|
|
this thread could have been solved with one post......
scammer tag due to a break of promise?
inaba/BFLJosh how many promises have you broken? and how many customers have been affected.
pot, kettle, black..
lock thread
That moment when you call the forums worthless yet try to get scammer tags for people who do exactly what you do. |
|
|
|
He does not run CoinLenders, I do.
Well, dont pay idiots for their sig space. Thats exactly what you get for having ppl advertise your business in their sig space. Their post would affect your business image. This is something I never understood about idiots paying other idiots for signature advertising space. It's unattractive spam that will make people hate your business, and whatever that person says now reflects on you.  |
|
|
|
|
Maged, I understand your skepticism considering Josh is an unscrupulous and unprofessional mouthpiece, but in this particular instance he is absolutely correct and I don't mind agreeing with him. When I made a trolling bet and didn't even bother trying to take anyone's money, it was considered as "an attempt to steal" even though such a thing can't even be proven, and I received a scammer tag followed by an "Untrustworthy" tag. Despite not trying to steal anything, I do agree that my actions were questionable and thus I don't defend them, I just hold my head in shame while paying people money that I don't even have.
If you defend Gar255 for his attempt to scam by rationalizing shill bidding as not being a scam, you're creating a double standard and removing any lesson I have ever learned from events that happened to me. Tread carefully.
|
|
|
|
I propose a movement to lobby local governments to allow for speed limit exemptions for those carrying a special speed license given to those who a) pass appropriate tests including physical reflex tests, b) receive special speed driver's training from a government mandated agency, or c) those who have experience professionally racing cars and can demonstrate their skill. Speeding laws are created to protect the majority from an unskilled minority it would seem, but just as air traffic is heavily controlled but still allowed through requiring a special pilot's license to travel the speed of sound, potentially endangering thousand of people in the process, and even more difficult licenses for commercial jet flight which can potentially endanger tens of thousands of people's lives anywhere in the world at any time, and just as firearms require a license to carry and shoot in public places that would otherwise prove competance to carry an otherwise deadly weapon on ones person, it seems this could easily be carried over to roadway vehicles as well (with exception for certain larger makes/types of course). The government has long called for exceptions to emergency vehicles, especially police in pursuit, but now ask for such exemptions 1 2 for non-emergency vehicles as well, showing that human beings when given authority and responsibility of the state do not lack the necessary skills to control vehicles on roadway while speeding. If such a license were possible, I think speeding would no longer be much of an issue, and like with most things, the relevant education would cause less accidents and allow people to respect the roads much more, thanks to their new training, fully knowing the risks involved. In a DailyPaul debate about speed limits and the need for vehicle licenses, some interesting comments were made, including this one: I drove the autobahn a total of twice and I was amazed at how safe I felt going 110 + on that highway. There's only 2 lanes most places and the trucks are going 55 - 70 in the slow lane and big black Mercedes (and others) are going 140+ in the fast lane. I looked carefully at the guardrails and the greenery along the highway for signs of the huge burn marks that must exist from the fireballs resulting from the high speed crashes but I saw NONE!. The guardrails were straight and true and the pavement was flat and smooth (real smooth). What I noticed very quickly was the way people drove on that highway. NO ONE ever switched into the "fast" lane until right on the bumper of the car they were overcoming. After lane signals, a very brisk lane change to the fast lane was taken and IMMEDIATELY after passing the slower vehicle another brisk lane change back into the slow lane. It was like watching a ballet. Every car moving in a predictable fashion. These rules were not enforced by "police". They were "enforced" by common sense. Traveling at high speeds requires extra caution and skill and if you aren't up to it, you stay in the slow lane. Before I learned this "rule" I thought I was pretty hot driving 110 and stayed in the fast lane for a while since I did not see any other traffic coming. I was quite surprised when I looked in my mirror to see a black Mercedes behind me with his left blinker on (a signal to get out of his way) and I quickly moved over and let him zip on by at what I estimate was about 130mph.
No, you don't need slow speed to keep you safe, you need drivers who exercise common sense. When you keep people "restricted" to the lowest common denominator, then "common sense" is a casualty. People stop exercising it and soon it withers and dies...
CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.
CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.
It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.
CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.
There is also an article on Motorists.org that talks about the myths of speeding vs. safety. Myth #1 - Speed Is a Major Cause of Accidents and Fatalities. NHTSA says 30% of fatal accidents are "speed related," meaning at least one vehicle was "assumed" to be exceeding the posted limit or traveling too fast for conditions. But such assumptions are meaningless when most traffic is 5-10 mph over limits set unnecessarily low.
A decade ago, authorities in Florida commissioned research to determine where best to concentrate enforcement resources to maximize their safety benefit. Statewide, this 1993 study found "Speed Too Fast" placed a distant fifth on the list of accident causes at just 2.2 percent. A 1994 follow-up study in Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties found 1.5 percent of accidents and seven percent of fatalities "caused by speed." Of nearly 23,000 accidents investigated in Palm Beach Country, approximately 13,000 were attributed to "careless driving," 7,000 to "failure to yield," 2,000 to "improper lane changes," and only 650 to "speed."
This was not welcome news to Florida enforcers, who (like everyone else) continue to focus resources on "speeding" because radar makes it easy and because (as Clyde Barrow once said about banks), that's where the money is. Those other far more significant causes are more difficult to witness, ticket, and prove in court. This is why such studies are seldom undertaken and even more rarely released, which leads us to Myth #2.
Myth #2 - Speed Enforcement Increases Safety. In 1995, the Feds gave Connecticut nearly $750,000 to intensify speed enforcement on 55-mph highways. Over that Memorial Day weekend, scores of extra troopers, airplanes, and unmarked cars armed with radar and laser were dispatched with the stated objective of reducing accidents and fatalities. Compared to the previous Labor Day weekend, speeding tickets were up an impressive 33 percent, seatbelt tickets were up a dramatic 51 percent and DWI (driving while intoxicated) tickets increased 22 percent. Yet accidents on those targeted highways increased a breathtaking 66 percent, proving (again) that there is no correlation between enforcement effort (numbers of tickets) and actual highway safety.
Research shows that if authorities truly want to reduce average speeds, the most effective way is through highly visible police presence. People naturally drive more safely and pay more attention to their speed when the enforcement is easily seen. Conversely, "stealth" enforcement (unmarked and hidden cars, airplanes, instant-on radar) is highly effective at generating tickets and revenue but not at decreasing speeds or accidents.
Myth # 3 - Slower Is Always Safer. Despite the oft-repeated mantra that "Speed Kills," Federal and state studies consistently have shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. Compared to keeping with the prevailing "pace," those driving 10 mph slower are statistically six times as likely--and those 20 mph slower are ten times as likely--to be involved in an accident. They get hit from behind or caught up in collisions caused by faster-moving vehicles suddenly braking and swerving to get around.
Since freeway "pace" is often well above posted limits, drivers are faced with the uncomfortable choice of legal speed or the higher, yet safer, prevailing speed. Actually, the drivers statistically least likely to be involved in accidents-perhaps because they are more alert--are those traveling 5-10 mph above the prevailing speed. Guess who gets the tickets.
Myth #4 - Use of Radar Detectors Increases Speeds and Accidents. Every time someone sets out to prove this popular presumption - and there have been many, many studies by enforcement authorities and others with a vested interest in banning detectors--they end up disproving it. One respected 1988 Yankelovich Clancy Shulman study showed that detector users actually had 23 percent fewer accidents per mile than nonusers.
What do detector users do when their dashboard defenders sound off? They quickly check and (if necessary) adjust their speed and increase their awareness. Scanning for police, they may instead see a dangerous condition or impending accident in time to avoid it. This is why police and (unmanned) "drone" radar senders are often used at accident, construction, and reduced visibility (dust, fog, snow) sites -- because traffic speeds and accidents decrease when detector users slow and pay closer attention, influencing others to do the same.
Myth #5 - The Federal 55-mph Limit Saved Thousands of Lives. Because it was established during the 1973 fuel crisis, people naturally drove less and slower to preserve precious fuel, which caused a brief downward blip in fatalities. Once fuel availability returned to normal, so did driving miles and speeds. And the highway death rate quickly snapped back to its (already downward) trend line.
Myth #6 - Speed Enforcement is Driven by Safety Concern. Though vigorously pursued in the name of safety to assure public and media support, it's been mostly about money for almost three decades. A recent feature in my local paper stated this clearly: "Citations rise to 6-year high," trumpeted the subhead. "The tickets are expected to pump a much-needed $1.5 million into the city's general fund." While public safety was the stated reason, no data was offered to show that our streets and highways are any safer as a result.
Myth #7 - Lower Speed Limits Reduce Average Speeds and Accidents. Multiple studies have shown that drivers adjust their speeds primarily to road, weather and traffic conditions. Setting limits at the "85th percentile" speed, where 85 percent are at or below (and only about 5 percent are significantly above), always results in maximum compliance and fewest accidents. Posting limits well below this 85th percentile speed (common practice) naturally increases the number of speeders -- and therefore potential ticket revenue -- but does not slow traffic any more than posting speeds well above it makes everyone drive too fast.
|
|
|
|
I don't know if this really classifies as a scam, underhanded yes, but not really a scam
Actually, it does qualify as a scam. People have had criminal charges doing the same. Auctions[edit]
Shills, or "potted plants", are sometimes employed in auctions. Driving prices up with phony bids, they seek to provoke a bidding war among other participants. Often they are told by the seller precisely how high to bid, as the seller actually pays the price (to himself, of course) if the item does not sell, losing only the auction fees. Shilling has a substantially higher rate of occurrence in online auctions, where any user with multiple accounts can bid on their own items. Many online auction sites employ sophisticated (and usually secret) methods to detect collusion. The online auction site eBay forbids shilling; its rules do not allow friends or employees of a person selling an item to bid on the item.[6]
In his book Fake: Forgery, Lies, & eBay, Kenneth Walton describes how he and his cohorts placed shill bids on hundreds of eBay auctions over the course of a year. Walton and his associates were charged and convicted of fraud by the United States Attorney for their eBay shill bidding.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill#AuctionsI didn't know that, it still doesn't seem like it should be Illegal. No one is forcing the other person to outbid the guy. If someone is willing to pay over the shill bid, then isn't the item worth that ? Auctions are not about what something is worth, they're about opportunity. Shill bidding something up 10 BTC steals 10 BTC worth of discount opportunity away from the winner, effectively scamming them of 10 BTC. You'll find that if you keep arguing this, you're going to come around to arguing why my troll bet with some members of the community was just trolling and not a real bet and the outcome of this thread will not be pretty. |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, as much as I think he is being mistreated by scumlords on this forum, I have to agree with the evidence regarding this particular event, shill bidding is most definitely scamming .
|
|
|
|
I have spent many days of this week chatting with our friend here until wee hours of the morning and decided to be a good samaritan to him since he genuinely seemed to be in a place I was when I was younger. - I offered him some advice on how to get back on track with life, including a stellar job offer (since I need to hire quite a lot of recruiters for a job I'm working now anyway and he seems stuck in a rut). He agreed to entertain the offer and thanked me for my motivation, that's good.
- I offered to help find him a place to live, I involved some friends who live near him, and before they could find a place he found one, so that was good.
- I offered him some food but he said he was good for now, so that's good.
- While discussing getting his GED, I pushed him to find prices and offered to pay the fees for him, he is still trying to set that up. That's good.
- While discussing how to get him to come overseas for a job offer, I instructed him on how to get his passport, and he said he could apply as early as tomorrow, that's good.
- I asked him where I could send him funds to help pay for his costs of making the passport and applying for GED (he can pay me later when he gets his job), and he gave me the Paypal address supposedly of his girlfriend's dad. A cursory internet search showed it belonged to what seems like a 12 year old scammer and emails associated with that only corroborated this.
- He instantly goes on the defensive and suddenly *I'm* the one who can't be trusted, that my "untrustworthy" tag from Theymos regarding a bad bet that I'm paying everyone for suddenly means he can't trust my sincere help (and refuses to speak logically and admit that I know absolutely nothing about him).
I hope he's just emotional and confused right now, because if it's not that, then he's a scammer. Keep this in mind before helping him anyone. I'm not saying *don't* help him, I'm just saying that you should most definitely get some kind of proof of who he actually is first. I hope I'm wrong (prove me wrong mate), but when you are a random name, no address, no face, etc, (doesn't matter if you can supply an ID, I've been scammed by many before with IDs up the ass) on the internet, the burden of proof is on *you*, not me, and you need to be logical if you want to continue moving forward, not emotional. Good luck in the future, I hope you get out of your rut (unless you're a scammer in which I wish you a continued stay in your rut). |
|
|
|
Avalon ASIC ASICs on time; Business done right.  I'm not anti-Avalon or anything, but that "pictures speak louder than words" stuff is propaganda and doesn't explain anything. Where are the shipping tracking numbers with activity on them? That speaks louder than pictures. |
|
|
|
I legitimately wanted your opinion on the particular laws that I mentioned in regards to peronsl movement.
My bad.  you dont' think laws should be in place regarding right to travel, restricting movement, etc.?
I think the way society has developed (in regards to reduced space in small areas), traveling rights have been forced to evolve with the times. Whereas I would not want people walking all over me while I sleep, I would not want someone driving in my driveway and hitting my car, so I think yes, the city/state has a perfect right to have rules for the road. I do not however think that a speeding law is necessarily applicable to all individuals and people should be allowed to have speeding licenses just as they have pilots licenses, licenses to carry deadly firearms, etc. Restricting movement sounds like a prison, I think if you find yourself in a hole or stuck behind a road, you should be able to leave (but not travel freely back and fourth). If you have a problem with this, I think you have a right to fight the people entrapping you with deadly force if necessary. Most people are not going to shoot you for walking on their land, but they might if you're a repeat offender who keeps stepping on their crops. Right to passage therefor should be provided as part of a society's duty to human beings, but only on foot. Fancy roads for driving cars? Regulate the shit out of that. |
|
|
|
I think he may be but you never know. I'll bet 1 BTC he turns bad on my sale.
Who are you talking about/to with this response? It's very vague. I think alex is for sure a scammer, but I don't know. and id be willing to bet 1 btc that he never comes through on the seal he had with me. I'm not naïve, but until someone other then you says its a virus or wtv I cant be sure Oh okay, that's what I thought you meant, just wanted to be sure (sounded like you were calling me a scammer lol) LOL, but you are a scammer matt! There is a difference between a trouble maker and a scammer. I admit I've been the former. The later is harsh, unnecessary, inaccurate, and the repeated senseless ramblings of people who have been here a whole 2 weeks. |
|
|
|
I am sorry but these guys are damaging bitcoin to satisfy their own personal greed.
So is basically every profiteering nutbag running the largest businesses in bitcoin. Do you think they're all interested in bitcoin to succeed for any reason other than to increase their own holdings off of suckers? Is there anyone left in this community who tough-loves bitcoin, enough to support it but also smack it silly when it needs it, or is it all corporate dick sucking cultist airheads and their MLM marketing meeting manager sociopaths who are too busy giving interviews, filing lawsuits against competitors, and begging the community to not let them fail because they're too big and important for the "cause"? Screw big business, screw people with propaganda and agendas, let's use bitcoin and vote with our bitcoin, not with a subscription membership to self importance, or ass kissing to false prophets. Bitcoin may be a "money game" by its nature, but it is no better than fiat if we keep giving people control over it for us. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
