Anyway first answer yes or no and stop being scared of us. YES OR NO?? it is totally acceptable for them to edit it or not.
You are setting a precedent for scammers to be able to edit the evidence of their scam posts. They can leave out details and change the entire perception of the ORIGINAL INCIDENT and many details the honest member should be entitled to read.
Why would I answer question after you said that I said something? Here we witness fear to answer yes or no. I feel it is your in ability to comprehend English. Let us clairfy. The statement is from our POV which we believe you are trying to express. Hence the question on the end to verify. Stop being afraid moron bozo Yes or NO? now that you understand. |
|
|
|
Well the first four years no one cared about selling accounts it was pretty much a non issue.
So if someone mention selling or wanting to buy an account or buying an account in the early years I could see people wanting to hide it.
For the record I never purchased or sold an account. But if you look at every post I did you would find some where I mentioned I was offered 0.25 btc to sell this account.
I did not mention the person that offered me the coin and I don’t remember if it was in 2014 or 2015.
I could see someone digging up that post and say why didn’t I tell the name of the person that offered me the coin. Well back then it was not a big deal.
Point is stuff that was okay at the time is not okay now. People go back and use stuff against you so I can see long time members going back to save grief.
Well let's not make this specific.. This is ...SHOULD ANY DT1 member or any other members be editing the evidence that demonstrates THEY were clearly guilty of financially motivated wrong doing. There is NO DOUBT on the issue of whether it was financially motivated wrong doing or NOT. There was no doubt in their mind they were guilty of facilitating scams for a price. Let us stay on topic. HOWEVER please research a LITTLE MORE. What you have posted is not at all relevant to what we are asking AND it certainly was not CLASSED AS OKAY BY ONE CERTAIN MEMBER WHO SAID YOU WERE EVIL AND FACILITATING SCAMS IF YOU SOLD YOUR ACCOUNT and they they were starting their own dedicated thread to ensure they (account sellers and buyers) were all brought to justice. These are NOT the words of someone who thinks that is okay. are they?? So strike the above post. This is not what we are talking about. We are saying if there is CLEAR INTENTION TO SCAM OR FACILITATE SCAMMING (not do something that is good, or okay). Intending to scam or facilitate scamming or other clear financially motivated wrong doing. Not to be confused with intention to do something that you are positive was okay or you think may be okay. YOU CLEARLY WERE CERTAIN YOU WERE EVIL AND FACILITATING SCAMMERS BUT FOR A PRICE YOU ARE GOING TO DO SO ANYWAY. Let's not get into specifics. This is a broad rule for consideration. Scammers and clear financially motivated wrong doing - when the evidence is presented to the board and it is highlighted (perhaps years after the event) does it look shady to go and edit this incriminating post ?? and place there an excuse and try to change the perception of the original deed? masking several important details or deleting them altogether, points and details that honest members should be privy to?? |
|
|
|
Yep another great excuse here everyone You will never guess why I merited that post  the rest of your post is confusing as usual.
If you could point me to part which you find confusing, I will try to explain it better, but please don't spam random nonsense. then tries to sell his account for 0.3btc
At least post correct information, which you can find in archived link which you asked for. I suppose that you have read it. Thanks for reporting it you good little croatian dog. Keep yapping, and reporting like a pathetic servile snitch
Reporting your post emotionally satisfied me. YOU say it is fine for scammers/scam facilitators to edit the evidence of thier scams after they have been busted and that is not shady behavior at all. I mean they leave them there for years on end BUT then when someone really starts to bring it to light years later they can edit them if they want, and that is totally acceptable and does not look shady. Is that what you are saying moronbozo? Yes or NO.
I am happy for you to say YES so please don't hold back.
You did it again. You said that I said something then you asked me am I saying it.
So lets see about this " EDITING HIS POST HISTORY TO HIDE HIS ACCOUNT SELLING PAST??". What do we know from edited nutildah's thread? They wanted to sell account and then they said they decided to keep account. What did we know from not edited nutildah's thread? They wanted to sell account and then they said they decided to keep account. Where is "hiding past" part? Let's skip past the rest of your off topic turd world blathering and ask you to say YES or NO. Scammers that get busted can go and edit their scam post after they find themselves busted years later and it does not look shady at all? YES OR NO Just answer what are you afraid of? then we can try to hammer out your other non points. HIS REASONING IS STATED CLEARLY (Occasionally after exposing a fraud or a charlatan for what they are they leave me a negative feedback with a link to this thread, which is likely why you are here. Congratulations!)when i bust others for " apparent" scams then they respond with a link to my willingness to facilitate scams for 0.3btc - So now I notice they are linking to this evidence I will adjust it so it looks better for me and make a weird excuse for needing to change it. As if they are WRONG to be linking to it and it NEEDS to be changed for that reason. Knowing people have started linking to it for his trust abuse in many cases he decides to adapt his original post. People linking to it and mentioning the other details that WERE there before now could have been making those up. LOL whatever the reason you can not be allowed to edit the very evidence that is there demonstrating your observable financially motivated wrong doing without it looking very shady. Anyway first answer yes or no and stop being scared of us. YES OR NO?? it is totally acceptable for them to edit it or not. The entire context and perception of the incident is being changed and excuses for adaption given. DISGUSTING. You are setting a precedent for scammers to be able to edit the evidence of their scam posts. They can leave out details and change the entire perception of the ORIGINAL INCIDENT and many details the honest member should be entitled to read. Your points seem valid to you. That is because you are incapable of seeing past the end of your nose, hence why you are called moron bozo and it is befitting. We will get into that after you answer yes or no. Also what does and does not emotionally sate you is rather worrying lol. You poor filthy wretch. |
|
|
|
Yep another great excuse here everyone Up to date ... deletes scamming attempt - decided not to scam now thanks for reading. I changed it 3 years later after I was busted for it because I like to keep things up to date. This is EVIDENCE of willful willingness to facilitate scams for money. Not just any post. This post is a classic also I wonder when this gets edited - nutildah in 2014 saying it is evil and facilitates scams if you offer your account for sale. ... then tries to sell his account for 0.3btc Imagine being SO SURE account selling is going to result in people being scammed and how you are going to make your own threads and report everyone who does it.... BUT WAIT for 0.3 BTC you will help ensure people get scammed and turn evil too hahaha new scammer can always alter that thread to say no longer for sale was just kidding? or if it does not sell I will just change it myself to only kidding I changed my mind on the OP either way just updating right? updating is allowed. It is commonly known that people buy and sell accounts. It is illogical to assume this.
Wrong. It is NOT commonly known, especially among noobs. I didn't know about it until a month ago or so, and then I couldn't believe that it was actively being endorsed by the mods. Regardless of if this is true or not, it is very immature to give something more weight just because a certain person said it; you should listen to specific arguments and facts not who is making the statement.
 ? Do you understand that people trade based on the rep of the username alone all the time? Regardless of your feelings on the subject, people do this every day all the time. If Satoshi came on here and said something I sure as hell would give it a lot more weight than when you say something. Even if I disagreed with what he was saying. In order to impersonate an identity, you would need to not own that identity in the first place. When you use the term impersonate you are implying that the identity does not belong to the poster, but in fact it does.
But this is obfuscated by the fact that most people don't know that they are reading the words of a bought account. There is no honesty or redeemable qualities in your arguments, you're simply trying to defend borderline evil behavior for your own selfish financial reasons.
Fixed. I've still yet to see any proof of accounts being sold to be used for 'mass propganda'.
Who cares what the person is gonna do with the account? Whatever it is, it is BULLSHIT because they are pretending to be a different person. This makes them a liar, an impostor, a bullshitter. And here you are a staff member defending this behavior. You guys are greedy beyond belief. What would Satoshi say if he read about this? I can't help but think he would say you destroyed the original intention of his forum and turned it into a breeding ground for scum and villainy.
I think the main rationale and reasoning for allowing accounts to be sold is because allowing them lets others know that the practice can and does go on and banning them may give people a false sense of security, not to mention banning their sale will not stop the behaviour from happening and only push it further underground and into obscurity.
This forum also doesn't moderate or ban scammers, but that doesn't mean we allow or encourage them nor do we profit from it in any way from it.
Still, you are impersonating somebody unless you disclaim that you bought their account, which never happens. So buying accounts is a 100% dishonest manuver. Its never been used for an honest purpose because pretending to be somebody you are not is lying. I dunno, while I appreciate your explanation, it still just seems that you are sticking up for criminals at the end of the day. I really don't understand how you guys can live with yourselves knowing how many crimes are committed here on a daily basis. I certainly hope you don't actually believe you are contributing to some benevolent force in the world because you are not. You're just telling thieves and scammers its OK to be a thief and scammer here. In the end it will decrease your revenue, not mine. Monitoring is underway.
I'm collecting two lists, one of account sellers and the other of account buyers. I will be sure to post this information, links and dates so everybody can see who to avoid from now on.
CANT WAIT FOR NUTILDAH TO UPDATE THESE POSTS ABOVE... ERR UPDATE TO WHAT?? IT IS OKAY TO SELL ACCOUNTS AND YOU ARE NOT EVIL AND FACILITATING SCAMS NOW?? haha updating, the cure for any attempted scam. This is the reason people archive scammers posts they reference because they may want to keep them up to date by putting.. no longer wanted to scam people really just kidding before. I changed this now because people kept using my post as evidence I was trying to scam people. However now you all know I never really wanted to scam people it's all cool right. Please stop using this as evidence against me because it won't work as well now. Just keeping you up to date on things. Many regards nutildahs twin pajeet. @moron bozo please do not derail with the " spamming of words" theory you are working on. Spamming words, does seem like a promising angle to weaponize. I would dedicate lots more time to this if I were you. Where is the spamming of words thread? This will be a lot of fun. Just don't try to go off topic and derail this thread with that theory now please or we will report it and if not deleted we will bring that to meta for examination. the rest of your post is confusing as usual. Please keep on topic. Thanks for reporting it you good little croatian dog. Keep yapping, and reporting like a pathetic servile snitch of course, but keep it on topic. We enjoy every bump even from the lowest form of pathetic dreg here. Keep coming up with brilliant new excuses. You have now your very first untrustworthy example we will shove in your turd world gob every time we feel like it. Well aside from you directly supporting scammers on to dt1 previously. But then that is just every dt1 member nearly so that is not so outstanding now. YOU say it is fine for scammers/scam facilitators to edit the evidence of thier scams after they have been busted and that is not shady behavior at all. I mean they leave them there for years on end BUT then when someone really starts to bring it to light years later they can edit them if they want, and that is totally acceptable and does not look shady. Is that what you are saying moronbozo? Yes or NO. I am happy for you to say YES so please don't hold back. |
|
|
|
not to mention that it was archived few times
my advice is always the same OP slow down read digest, then post again. https://archive.is/BBMFHThis is on Nutildahs trust page. So they provided you with the answer you were looking for, you just had to look. It is good that is had been archived. The entire point of archiving scammers posts as evidence is PRECISELY because you know scammers will edit them once busted LOL This is scammer style 101. It does NOT alter the fact that nutildah edited the thread title and body text that he knows is prime evidence of his financially motivated wrong doing. This is shady as fuck. I wonder what other edits he has been making of late?? How about all scammers just start changing their scam posts to whatever they want after they get busted?? we will say that is totally fine right? This is a DT1 member. A MOST TRUSTED member of the entire board. Haha If you are all going to make up excuses for this. All the better for us. We will simply be presenting those excuses over and over and over. It's okay to edit your scam posts after you are busted because. 1. some people already know in meta 2. one person has archived it (lucky right) 3. It has been mentioned enough ffs keep them coming guys....these are going to be gems at some point. Changing years old posts once people demonstrate they are evidence of financially motivated wrong doing is TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE PRACTICE BY DT1 members. You heard it here first. |
|
|
|
You said it so many times that probably every "guest" who has never registered account here knows this, not to mention that it was archived few times and someone linked it on nutildahz trust page. What is the point of creating another thread for something you mentioned at least 500000 times in your posts?
brilliant excuse moronbozo are you like the croatian version of johnny cochran? so moronbozo says It is acceptable for DT1 members to edit the proof that confirms they are guilty of financially motivated wrong doing and it does NOT look shady. It is only strange that a person may mention this move to edit the original form of evidence after many years. Is that what you are saying moronbozo? If someone presents observable evidence of past financially motivated wrong doing of DT1 then it is acceptable for them to alter that evidence and you should not even be allowed to mention it. Watch them all club together to say 1. it is perfectly acceptable 2. you should not be mentioning it because ..... err you mentioned something different earlier. what a bunch of scum bags. If any non DT members was busted for financially motivated wrong doing and then after being busted altered the evidence they would be screaming how shady that was. They referenced it?? so now when you click the link you get a different heading and different text to what they referenced hey?? that is useful. All scammers should do this, just change the text that DT members reference as evidence of what DT members class as " financially dangerous" which can range from whistle blowing to deleting unsubstantiated allegations from their own self moderated threads, etc. Moronbozo for you everyone. Prior DT1 and scam hunter. @raymun thanks for that, would have given you more merits if we had many ourselves to give. Sadly merits are with held from posts that present the truth generally where we post. here it is... http://web.archive.org/web/20190704162438/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.0-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: nutildah Posts: 2152 Activity: 560 Position: Hero Member Date Registered: April 19, 2014, 11:50:27 AM Trust: 0: -0 / +0 My posts were frequently contentious and sometimes downright argumentative, but that's because I'm a real person who was genuinely interested in bitcoin and this forum, and I wasn't just trying to build up an account to sell it or do sig campaigns.Its a completely anonymous account, never been linked to my real identity. I stopped posting for the most part about 6 months ago. I would like 0.3 BTC for it. You can get back to me here or via PM. Thanks! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WOW that was deleted fast by the scum bag mods and some fucking piece of shit reporter, no double posting LOL okay we will just add it all here then. funny though we notice a NEW GEM here. Nutildah or seems to have a had a big change of heart on spamming sig campaigns right?? that pajeet is all over ANY sig campaign that will have him even disputing flags that are made against his scampaigns LOL Really a bitcoin enthusiast NOT HERE SELL MY ACCOUNT OR TO DO SIG CAMPAIGNS.... OH REALLY So then I just tried to sell it and can't stop spamming sig scampaigns hahaha |
|
|
|
You have no evidence to prove that. Anyone could post that after a sale. The OP was edited very recently and this is shady. LOL to the common knowledge excuse. You do NOT edit your past histories especially when they are PROOF of financially motivated wrong doing. Scammers go ahead and delete your posts they used as evidence of scamming, you will receive NO criticism - there is nothing wrong with it. Steamtyme says 0.001% of the board knows about it on meta, that is fine then just amend it as you please now LOL The original TITLE and body should be there. WHY EDIT THE ORIGINAL PROOF OF YOUR FINANCIALLY MOTIVATED WRONG DOING IF YOU ARE NOT TRYING TO ALTER PEOPLES PERCEPTION OF HOW IT REALLY WENT DOWN. The thread should be restored to its original form. The original sales pitch and the 0.3 btc asking price should NOT BE HIDDEN from public review. Especially since this is now being highlighted as evidence of financially motivated wrong doing. This makes it LOOK WORSE, it is very clear he is more than ashamed. We will be taking this up with his sponsor and the main board. This is not the behavior of a DT1 and merit source. @loyceV - well since you gave us 1 merit then we decided to give you another chance at proving you can be civil and neutral. We treat people as they have treated us and our friends as we have PROVEN the last time you tried to say we just randomly started being negative in your direction. You have always been aggressive or very negative to us /our friends first. If you prefer it that way that is up to you. You can not deny this, so either be neutral and analyse our posts objectively or keep screaming trolling at us and we will respond in an unfriendly manner to you. We ask for no friends, we simply want our posts analysed with objectivity not being derailed and sniped at. You have no past the point of no return with us since you have not actually scammed nor have you trust abused to our knowledge. If you keep derailing and screaming trolling at undeniable observable instances then you will not only show yourself up, you will be treated as hostile by us. Do you note we are polite with EVERY member that has not attacked us or joined in and supported our attackers and abusers? Have another look and see if we speak the truth. The main bone of contention is you seem to believe merit scores have value. They have none. That seems your main issue with our posts. If you have scraped the board even a couple of months ago you should have the unedited post should you not? Who else does backups of this board. Except theymos obviously. Usually we archive most things but since that had been used as evidence so many times we assumed even nutildah would not be crazy enough to try to alter or edit it. It would just look far too shady. |
|
|
|
|
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.
WHY EDIT IT AT ALL IF YOU ARE NOT HIDING ANYTHING. PUT IT BACK EXACTLY AS IT WAS BEFORE.
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.
|
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1622642.5Nutildah has edited the post where he had put his account for sale for 0.3 BCT How shady is that? ? Come on loyceV where is the original unedited post?? MORE SCUMBAG BEHAVIOR. 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. START READING HERE READ THE REST OF THAT THREAD - before nutildah (UPDATES IT LOL) https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=789658.msg8951438#msg8951438just 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.
|
|
|
|
I don't look in this area often, or at all. But somehow I got mentioned and it popped up. I don't really have anything to say. sMerits can decay (or so it says) You have received a total of 1 million merit. This is what determines your forum rank. You typically cannot lose this merit. You have 5 billion sendable merit (sMerit) which you can send to other people. There is no point in hoarding sMerit; keeping it yourself does not benefit you, and we reserve the right to decay unused sMerit in the future.
You are a merit source. The next 4 billion merit you spend will come from your source rather than your sMerit balance. Merit spent from your source will come back in 5 seconds. Unused source merit is wasted. It is not allowed for merit sources to sell their merit. I joined this forum long before there were Legendary members, before Activity was a thing, and before Merits or sMerits existed. Let me tell you a parable: There was a son. He said "Father, give me merits"... then he goes away to a distant forum and spends it all. Then there is famine.
He thinks "Oh my, I am posting crap and not getting paid for it, I will go back to my father and he will treat me like one of his hired spammers and I can eat."
So, the prodigal son returns, and even before anyone else can see him, gets awarded 18 merits from an otherwise infinite supply. ... if that doesn't make you think, let me tell you another story: I hire 3 people to work in my vineyard:
Person one comes in the morning, works all day, I pay him 10 merits.
Person two come noon time, works the rest of the day, I pay him 10 merits too.
Person three comes late in the afternoon, works until evening, I pay him 10 merits too.
Person one comes to me complaining "Why did you pay person 3 the same as me, I have worked 8 more hours than him?"
I answer "Would you rather you not get paid at all? Don't come to work for me then." I am not God, I never claimed to be. Whatever act of injustice you perceive, why not think of it as mercy. Merit being given to you does not depend on your desire or effort but on the will of whoever gives it. Would you despise someone for offering the kingdom to poor, oppressed, weak sinners because they were made equal to you? Again, I am not God, so don't nail me to any cross. If you do, please, let me be the good thief. At least today, I will be in paradise. The dude probably doesn't even know what merit is. Or could care less. In this thread alone, 20 of the posts have signatures (from campaigns). I don't care about that either. But maybe someone who only got 17 merits is complaining because someone else got 18 merits. I'm not sure. But I'll err on the side of caution and give the OP a merit to make him equal to the one he's complaining about. The post is otherwise "high-quality" even if I disagree with it. This is quite an insightful post. Via these nice parables you describe merit as it is now: meaningless, unfair and totally unrelated to the value/effort of the contribution. Also if you dare to complain how unfair and crazy merit allocation is in meta board... you are off the vineyard immediately. The strange thing is since most here are totally advocating it is fine to just give merit to any post you like, even perhaps 50 for a 5 year old one word post and nobody disputes that mods and dt's often merit one liner off topic derailing garbage or even posts that have been debunked clearly right there in the next post ... THEN IT IS VERY STRANGE that we should have a meta board stocked full of people that also believe this merit score SHOULD be the basis for TRUST, ability to be paid2post, your rates of paid2post, your ability to trade, and now your volume. It is like admitting the merit score is meaningless and then demanding it should have meaning LOL The very notion you can build on top of such a meaningless score AT ALL is laughable. Where is theymos to detail the reasoning behind giving MERIT such meaning and influence when clearly everyone knows IT HAS NO SOLID MEANING AT ALL, it is practically impossible to demonstrate abuse because it is so wide open to abuse?? I mean imagine providing SUCH POWER and INCENTIVE to game and abuse a metric and then leave it so wide open to ABUSE AND GAMING .... hehe This thread and the replies given demonstrate clearly that which is UNDENIABLE from the start. MERIT is totally meaningless and unreliable dirt. It is a cancer that turns an otherwise level playing field into a guaranteed 2 tier system where control of nearly every aspect is handed to the most successful manipulators and ruthless gamers for selfish reward. The results demonstrate this quite clearly. You just need to think about it. Well if you are stupid you do. I mean anyone else can just look at how it works and immediately observe it is broken. Dabs answer is clearly... You can fuck off and if I want to give merits to someone for simply saying they collected their shit tokens he will. WHY because that is what merit is for. You just give it to any post you like and nobody can say anything about it. You just say well I think it is a GOOD post and deserves some merit. That's the end of it. Or if that does not work you can say, well he made some other post I thought was good and I think he needs to power up so I sprinkle some over this other posts when I feel like it. So what? I mean why is someone saying they collected their shit tokens ANY WORSE than DT members screaming trolling at posts that when challenged they can not debunk or even deny because observable instances can not be denied. Or how is it worse than offering a faux specious rebuttal to an undeniable description of how things observably function? well go ask theymos himself. He gives merit to faux rebuttals and specious arguments and he designed merit right? this is leading by example. If dabs has abused merit for giving it to a seemingly low value statement ( i mean one could view it as valuable if others were asking, hey has anyone got their shit tokens yet? or their incent bonus yet perhaps all worrying they were going to be scammed or worrying where their next bowl of rice was coming from then that post could have presented them with a lot of value) then you can pretty much say nearly EVERYONE of DT1 have abused merit here in meta (a couple of exceptions). The OP is totally within his right to bring up what he believes are abuses or inconsistencies. If only he had read meta board before posting he would have know it is futile to present even undeniable evidence that merit is garbage and abused. Theymos does not care at all. The more you demonstrate his merit baby is destroying free speech and creating a 2 tier system for members , the more he digs his heels in and gives MORE incentive to game and manipulate it harder. Merit can not be abused until there is strict criteria set in place to set a minimum value threshold to each post. Giving merit to misleading and specious well written arguments, or meriting 1 liner off topic derailing insults and allegations that have been debunked many times, is worse than giving it to those that are telling others they got their shit tokens paid out so don't worry. Well done to dabs, well done to everyone who is saying you can give merit for any shit you want. Let's be honest about merit. You can give it to any crap you want if you feel like it. If people demonstrate you gave it to debunked garbage, one liner off topic derailing debunked allegations, specious misleading arguments, or just for posting I want some merits......tell them fuck off I can give it for any reason I want. Nothing will be done. Well done to the OP. It has helped serve as a thread we will reference to demonstrate clearly most peoples reasoning and understanding of merit allocation. You have every right to highlight issues if you think it will help this movement. |
|
|
|
Why do we have to care about how others use their merits? They have rights to hold their merits or send them to any posts of any user they want. There is no official guide or rule on how to send merits. Ideally, merits should be sent to good posts, but it does not matter if someone sends merits to a funny one. For one post, I can agree with it, or like it, and send my merit to it, but others can disagree or don't like it, and of course, they don't send their merits to it. That topic was locked weeks ago, but I think it contains some useful and valuable ideas. Sendable merit, how to use it? Send it when agree/ disagree with posts?BINGO It is meaningless garbage, and impossible to abuse really. Dabs can give merit to garbage (not that those posts are especially garbage in the context of meta board) and nobody can say anything about it. It can not be abused by DT or mods. Theymos may remove merit sources if they give merit to excellent high value posts if the merit source has said he will focus on giving merit to those persons his political views align with. So merit is meaningless dirt. There can be no other way of seeing it. I mean some mods here merit derailing off topic one liner insults and it is fine. Or some mods , DTs and merit sources will merit DEBUNKED false accusations just because they can and find it fun to do so. Theymos does not mind about that at all. Meantime theymos is happy to allow the merit cancer to determine nearly all aspects of governance and control. You can imagine how that is working out. If you have time pull up all DT1's top 20 merit fans and recipients. You may find that rather interesting. Then look at who includes who on DT and cross reference that with the dirty turds thread. If you are not on the merit merry go round and actually want some merits (not that you probably do now that we have explained it is meaningless garbage) certainly do NOT mention it is clearly abused in the sense it is not given to merit worthy posts. Dabs is nowhere near abusing compared to what you will find if you start poking into some meta board threads and have the capacity to determine real value from clearly incorrect debunked low functioning spew. Challenging the governing group regarding their merit giving habits will never meet with any support. The merit system DIRECTLY ensures a two tier system they themselves control and ensures they get on chipmixer and other high paying sig spots, take the escrow positions , your right to trade or be paid2post and now if your post will be seen. I hope that helps the OP see the futility of any merit complaints in meta. |
|
|
|
|
It is improbable that the person that designed bitcoin would also design the systems of control we see implemented here on this forum.
It is possible but seems unlikely to us. If he did turn out to be satoshi though that would be pretty interesting and improvement over many others that have been suggested.
|
|
|
|
I don't like YoBit and I don't like this campaign. In fact, I detest it. The 'solution' of using a campaign manager is merely a fragment of what I would have wanted - the eradication of the campaign.
There is a question to be asked, though... Is CryptoTalk a scam?
Once you have your answer, consider this: this may be a proxy for YoBit to shill their site in the future, that is, a way of bypassing the previous signature ban on the YoBit site directly.
Then finally: if you were to red tag YoBit participants, should you also tag CryptoTalk participants based on this speculation?
Okay I respect your position on this and I would I like my voice to be heard. I know, it does not matter much but still. Yobit, so far according to my knowledge has not scammed any user. It has listed shit projects, it has shilled its investbox without much mettle to it, but none of it actually accounts as something that is worthy of being tagged as a scam. On top of that, everyone that has a functioning brain knows this that Yobit is promoting its own forum and in turn its own exchange through this campaign. We all get it. But what I don't understand is why a blanket tag to everyone, especially for people that are responsibly participating in this campaign 'the right thing to do'? Please keep in mind, that you are someone I respect because you have a clear stance on things and are logical when you draw your conclusions. So please help me see things the way you see it. Your voice of course does not matter. Simply because you are an imbecile. You are also a pajeet that will say, do or promote anything for some small fragment of btc dust. Now have another read you blathering dreg and understand that I am clearly telling you that what yobit has done is clearly a blatant theft of peoples wealth. They turned off withdrawals of sys so you could not withdraw them before the update to v4. Sys devs asked them repeatedly to switch it back on. There was no issue with the wallet and bittrex was running it fine as were every other exchange. Since yobit has a strong reputation for switching off withdrawals for YEARS people immediately panic and dump it down to silly prices just to get out AT ALL. This is creating their own markets where coins are still trading there for 50% or 20% they do on other exchanges. Can you imagine what an exchange can do when their markets are still trading but at such a lower price?? that is not even considering the immediate theft of peoples coins or the huge losses people are forced to take just to get ANYTHING BACK for coins? CBX was another very old and stable pos project at the time, this wallet was switched off one day, the devs asked why? NO ANSWER, the devs kept asking for years NO ANSWER the wallet is fine on the other exchanges like cryptopia (until they decided to close keeping everyones coins). This is pure theft. Now keep reading until it penetrates your incredibly dense skull. @welch I am not sure if you are just kidding around. How can the devs, other exchanges and every other user be using the wallets just fine and confirm NO ISSUES, but yobit turns off the wallet for months or years with no replies to the devs or customers? you can confirm this by asking the sys dev teams or the cbx dev teams and their communities. There are many more that have suffered this at yobit but those are 2 off the top of our head. USER ERROR you say? how would that work? I mean just explain how user error could account for this? do you mean to suggest the improbable scenario where the dev teams, the other exchanges, the entire community are making a user error in running the wallets okay themselves? and that yobit is the only one that is not making the error by turning the wallet off and cancelling withdrawals ........because....err well nobody knows why because they don't reply. The only USER ERROR is using yobit and believing you will be treated as you should be by an exchange that is credible and not deserving of a huge warning. How about I tell you after seeing the note from your bank " sorry we are keeping your money, you can switch your balance out to another bank but you just get 10c on the dollar" i'll come to your bank with you to confirm...and they say the same thing, when we ask why?... they just walk off and won't answer? You look at me and say, see these thieves are just taking my money away, it's been like this for a year..fucking scammers. I say to you, in cases like these it is generally user error? you look confused and start to imagine how fun it would be to dragon-punch me there and then. If you are really interested ask the sys coin dev team, ask the community, or go buy some sys coins at bittrex and transfer them to yobit and then try to extract them again. Well DONT do that actually because you will lose all of your funds for several reasons. I had a message once from a proud owner of lots of shiny new coins who had just had his long term order at yobit filled for only 50% of the cost he was buying them on bittrex. By the time I had read this message the next message was far less enthusiastic ..........it went along the lines, ...those fuckers have switched off the withdrawals is it true they do this for sometimes years dude?. The next message from him was something like .... " fuck it I had to dump it at just above half I got it for because I think it's the only way to recoup anything from that now, never using that place again once I get my funds off of there I suggest you do the same" Trading is not the easiest thing in the world for some even when you given a fair chance in terms of trading on the exchange. When you throw this into the mix then it is just rough on a lot of people. Needs to be prevented really. Play fair or be branded with a warning.. No ifs buts or maybes because you are getting paid. Zero tolerance. Same rules for all. |
|
|
|
No, they don't, especially when the contract clearly says it can change at any time. Legally, I even believe that the announcement is not mandatory.
That is not true, you can't possibly change the terms without the other party agreeing to the "new" amendments/changes , the term "“We Can Change These Terms at Anytime" only declares that they are not obligated to stick to the agreement "forever", it means exactly that, nothing more nothing less. The court in Rodman v. Safeway, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17523 (N.D. Cal. 2015), similarly refused to impose a duty on website users to continually check for changes to online terms. Rodman was another case in which the author of online terms of use posted changes to those terms on its website but made no attempt to notify its customers of the changes. The defendant attempted to justify its actions by highlighting a clause in its original terms of use that reserved the right to amend the terms at any time and imposed a duty on the customer to keep up with changes to the terms. Like the court in Douglas, the court in Rodman stressed that it is unreasonable to expect a customer to check a website regularly for changes to online terms. Moreover, the court, applying traditional contract doctrine, noted that a customer could not assent to future changes of which there was no reason to know would come. source and more interesting facts here > https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/blt/2016/05/07_moringiello/in most country if not all, notifying your clients about any changes to the agreement is a must, unless the "court" orders you to do otherwise , in fact even if you notify your clients in a manner that the court does not find reasonable it's as good as not having informed them in the first place. This means an exchange like crypto-bridge can't make a tweet in Chinese and then expect the court to find it a reasonable way of notifying clients , in fact in most cases companies lose cases due to clients proving that they were not informed, " My email address was hacked and I had no way to see the notification from crypto-bridge." is in MOST cases good enough for a client to win the case , let alone not attempting to notify users in the first place. Therefore, unless a court order has taken place, stating that crypto-bridge MUST seize it's clients' funds until and unless they submit KYC then , crypto-bridge is in deep shit. Fully decentralized exchanges are the only way forward. Shame more people do not support them. Then this kind of thing and exit scams would not keep happening.
Makes a lot of sense if you ask me, however there will never be a "Fully decentralized exchange" unless it's ran and managed by aliens and hosted out side of the milky way, as long as the exchange is located in any place that is reachable by any authority it will always be under some sort of rules and regulations, don't get me wrong , I am all about decentralization, but honestly speaking nothing in this world is fully decentralized, not even bitcoin itself. It is our understanding that a REAL decentralized exchange with full atomic swaps would be pretty much as decentralized as bitcoin (not quite) . You should have zero risk of losing your coins. We mean a real decentralized exchange like blocknet has created and binance tried to copy from them, perhaps they did manage to copy it I can't recall the story now . They are not taking off because they require a slightly higher level of study before use. People are lazy and impatient. You want super convenient then risk getting scammed with insta KYC over night or exist scammed or pretend hacks etc etc. TBF a lot of exchanges have introduced kyc or no withdrawals although perhaps not on the same day may they did, can't recall. I think most have given a bit of grace. |
|
|
|
|
@actmyname
It is our personal opinion that any member/org/corp found to be scamming should also have a warning placed on any future project from them regardless of whether it is "currently " scamming or not. That would seem only prudent.
Either way, this should be set in stone and made into a part of the transparent rules that all members/projects are measured against. No room for saying well they will pay us so lets wait for proof or hmmm they are competition to our sponsors lets not wait for proof this time. NO that is bogus.
You can't just keep switching and changing... oh we need to wait for PROOF... no we can't wait for proof because it is too late...
I say the only way is to wait for PROOF, but yes for some by then it will be too late. However, you need to consider, shooting early on a hunch, could result in many innocent people taken out . I would personally see the greedy and high risk gamblers burned before innocent people for something they have not done nor intended to do.
In life people who want to believe they can get 500% returns with no risk need to wake up, if you are going to send your magic internets money to people, do some deep personal research, or don't cry when it does a vanishing act.
@welch
I do not think if you are scamming 1% or 5% or 0.1% of your client base you can rely on volume or the good reports from those you are not currently scamming to protect you from a warning sign here. If you are running a large scheme you only need to thieve from 1% to make yourself very wealthy. If there is evidence you have scammed even one person and do not make it right you are a scammer and need a warning.
If your bank suspended your account forever with your money there and said you can switch your balance another bank to withdraw but only at 10c on the dollar rate. We think you may class this as stealing or scamming. I don't think you will be saying look at all the other happy customers and look how big that bank is... they must be sort of okay else more would be freaking out. People only mostly care about themselves really. If they are okay fuck the poor guy that got scammed that;s their tough shit.
There is no reason to take wallets offline that are working and refuse to put them back online after years of being asked nicely by the dev team. Those wallets are functioning fine for everyone else.
Yobit is certainly worthy of a warning tag, there is in our opinion no way one can justify sending people to their services without warning they could have their coins detained for no reason for years and perhaps for good.
To be honest it is not yobit per say that is the issue or their forum. It is the double standards. Some people are given scam tags by DT members for advertising projects that DT members may perhaps turn into a scam.
The double standards here is MAIN ISSUE. It seems that you need no proof of scam for projects that are not paying campaign managers or DT members are promoting them. Suddenly you need undeniable proof if they are being paid. This is wrong. There needs to be a set standard for ALL members and ALL projects regardless of whether certain people here can squeeze some money out of it.
Transparent rules ensuring equal treatment of all members/projects.
Sure yobit are not THE WORST and they could fix their shit. They need to get on with it, but it will not save those that have dumped out at huge losses when they need not have done if yobit had not just taken the wallets off line or turned off withdrawals.
POLONIEX are also guilty of doing this on a bit of smaller scale. I hope those get busted for this too. However, they seem to have opened the coins for withdrawal NOW that they are worth 1% of what they were when they turned it off. That coin had a fully functioning wallet and bitrex was running theirs fine. That is a scum bag move. This is not a couple of weeks, this is a year or more.
Anyway just get up some transparent rules and stick to them. No swapping around.
This already gives plenty of ammo for others here who will start claiming "proof or double standards". Also the can of worms ...can a project that scammed start a new project without that project having a warning. This is why the environment here will always be suboptimal. People simply do not like to see double standards enforced on them.
Best to draw a line in the sand and that is that with financially dangerous members or projects. Zero tolerance. Sadly since many DT members are scammers or scammer supporters that line will not be drawn by them. (not all, but even those that just want to stay out of it are too weak for DT positions, you need people that will do the right thing however unpopular you will become)
This will be our last post here on the yobit/CT thing since they are not a prime concern to us and can't spend too much time on that. We are primarily interested in pushing for transparent fair standards that is it. They are not the worst here and therefore unfair to use them too much to highlight the need for fair consistent action. Unless people believe they see reasons to disagree with our points.
|
|
|
|
Although we're advice not to feed the trolls but here's what i have to say concerning this issue. Is yobit a shady exchanges, yes but is Cryptotalk a shady forum? Maybe, maybe not. We have no proof yet so we can't conclude. From the look of things, it seems the only associated between the two projects is that cryptotalk is using Yobit panel as a management platform. Now until that is proven otherwise we can judge Cryptotalk based on the reputable of yobit.
Concerning @Yahoo's association with the project through management, this has been debated on and it's better that way than the previous of leaving any campaigns requiring high number of post which will definitely result to spamming to operate unmoderated.
Like others said there's no active scam accusation against Yobit. They have made bad decisions in past advertising campaigns on this forum, and have paid the price. However, they have made the step in the right direction, and those that are claiming "Yobit does what it wants" obviously isn't true if they've resorted to using a campaign manager, and a reputable at that. It was obvious that they tried to save as much money as possible, and thought they could brute force their way into Bitcointalk. Which obviously didn't work out for them, and in return they had their signature banned from the forum. Even if you were to judge Cryptotalk based on the existing reputation of Yobit. It hasn't been confirmed that they have scammed anyone, and the only real criticism you can say about them is regarding the whole Yobit spam, but they're at least making steps in the right direction. I haven't used Yobit, because I don't really have a need for an exchange, and I don't deal in altcoins. However, if I ever did I'd probably remember them just from the shenanigans that have happened. Would I like them to make a little more effort, and place more restrictions on who can enter into their campaign? Yes, probably. However, at the moment I haven't seen too many spammers on the Yobit signature campaign, and for those that are will hopefully be removed shortly by Yahoo. Despite their history on the forum, everyone knows about them, and with an effective strategy for the existing campaign every new comer into Bitcoin will likely hear about them. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the go to option in the future just because of the amount of exposure they seem to be able to get. What??? Yobit HAS for years taken wallets down of fully functioning coins, for years ignored developers requests to put them back online, deliberately not updated to new forks. I mean if you turn markets withdrawals off the markets panic and immediately dump leaving your coins there trapped. WTF are you talking about NOT proven they scammed anyone. You can not do this to traders. This is completely out of control. This is not tiny projects either. SYS coin was not even updated it was a top 50 project at the time and they did not update leaving peoples coins trapped there on the old chain and unable to be withdrawn or swapped. Same for several projects. This is perhaps not a deception ie scam (we think there is sensible expectation exchanges do not do this as commmon practice.). It is more like PURE THEFT. This is likely more dangerous than 99% of the 2 bit scammers DT run around trying to pretend to stop. " I have not used yobit and do not use alt coins" ... which section do you moderate?? Please stick to commenting on the things you have experience with. Or you are publishing misleading information. Yobit are not exit scamming yet or denying btc withdrawals etc but they can not be allowed to switch wallets off for years on end and leave them off for no good reason. Imagine your bank just said sorry no withdrawals now, you can switch you balances to another bank and withdraw but you only get 10% on the dollar if you do this. LOL totally not a a scam. |
|
|
|
|
If they have not given any prior warnings kyc was coming before the date it was activated (at least one month) then it looks like they are likely hoping a lot of people will NOT wish to give their personal details and will leave their coins there for them to " look after".
Pretty scammy if that is the case. If you can get a flag going that could put some pressure on them to give a week or 2 grace before it goes live. Then again if they think the loot will be considerable from abandoned accounts they may not budge.
Fully decentralized exchanges are the only way forward. Shame more people do not support them. Then this kind of thing and exit scams would not keep happening.
|
|
|
|
|
LOL
The poster is presenting you with the opportunity of reading their output. If they feel part of it worthy of bold then they will use it.
Of course ALL BOLD is going to make it harder to read, but selectively using bold for what they consider important is actually very useful and can SAVE YOU TIME.
Anyway what's the hurry for someone retired who hangs out in mc donalds all day?
We hardly bold anything, It is far quicker to slap caps lock down and off.
People tell us all the time " we never read your long winded junk" then somehow they know every detail we have posted lol.
If it is interesting to them, people read it bold or no bold.
Do you turn down hot girls because she is wearing tight jeans and not a skirt with no panties? put that bigmac down and put some effort in. Those new annoying paper straws are a killer for the milkshakes though, we give you that.
|
|
|
|
I would much rather have theymos ban all signatures than have signature campaigns continue.
I would much rather have theymos ban YoBit signatures than have the campaign continue.
I would much rather have yahoo manage YoBit than have the campaign managed by someone who will allow spam to proliferate.
I would much rather allow spam to proliferate than... no, I wouldn't have spam proliferate.
The main problem I have right now is the number of "why is yahoo managing the campaign" threads. It's starting to border on spam, now.
Wrong There can be NO promoting of scams or scammers. There is ONLY one way to operate as I have just said. You need to decide if something meets the transparent clear threshold of scamming or scammer, then red trust ANYONE that promotes it or advertises it. Those can be removed once they understand or come to learn the error of their ways. Sig bans are suitable for those that wish to continue advertising after they have been told. As if SPAM even comes close to SCAM in terms of endangering members here. This we must worry about spam to the point of helping to advertise SCAM FOR PAY is totally bogus. IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT 1. yobit is a scam or 2 Yobit is cryptotalk that is a different matter. If you believe though that either are true or highly PROBABLE then you should be red trusting any person promoting them or advertising them. THIS bogus crap we must help fight SPAM whilst helping promote SCAMS is laughable. DOUBLE STANDARDS ELSE Any other scams must be treated in the same way. yahoo or hhampuz must manage them (because apparently they are the "best" people for the job although they just rely mostly on the gamed and manipulated metrics that the broken systems of control fart out) and people pushing scams will not get red trust or have any action taken against them IF THEY DO NOT SPAM. Haha sorry that repeating THIS TRUTH is more upsetting to you at this point that scams being advertised by your buddies. Please stop the spam of truth whilst people profit from assisting the advertising of scams. In the name of PROTECTION. Stopping PURE SPAMMERS AND SHITPOSTERS advertising it does NOTHING to protect the members from getting SCAMMED. Actually one could possibly say that if you restricted advertising of scams to "the most trusted" "the most merited" then you would be ensuring greater success of the scams because people would have MORE faith in those promoting the said scams LOL Quick protect us more. As previously stated if we are going to WAIT for PROOF cryptotalk is yobit that is different. Then this must be the standard for all new POSSIBLE or PROBABLE scams. If you are referring (as you did ) to yobit directly)then our point is clear and undeniable. @assjob ssshhhh first go out into the real forum and achieve something. Don't waste time trying assist those that are in no need of your help. The one on topic point you made, was already answered and covered. WAIT FOR PROOF with ALL possible scams or scammers OR NOT. Of course you may say well a scammer can scam on one project and then start a new project where he has not yet scammed and it must be allowed to proceed without warning? We don't think that should be the case, but again this is a different debate. Let's establish a standard for ALL projects and ALL members. Not keep swapping the standards depending on if certain people are receiving payment or not. |
|
|
|
NOW we require hard proof before action? what is this waiting for proof now? I thought waiting for proof was CRAZY because the damage will be done after they have scammed.
Who will be scammed by this campaign ? when anyone on the forum click on the signature, it will take them to https://cryptotalk.org which is a forum and no one is getting scam by visiting or signup that forum. We had heard they were keen to work with YOBIT themselves anyway previously?? directly... so it is fortunate it went to them isn't it.
So what ? Its a win win situation for everyone... If you had a business and money then you would hire the best manager , isn't ? Exchanges are some of the most dangerous places for newbies and even experienced members. If anything they should have extra scrutiny. Any projects related at all to a rogue exchange needs to be flagged up with a lemons flag at a minimum. Or is that just for whistle blowers?
Again no one is promoting Yobit in their signatures. Unless you see a link of yobit, its just useless to keep pressing on this point. Your points may seem reasonable to you. However, for those that are capable of slightly deeper thought and are not likely influenced by being paid for being short sighted or wearing rose tinted spectacles. 1. consider scammers could certainly use a forum of their own for plenty of things that certainly could put the members and visitors at great risk, now or in the future. Undeniable 2. Win win? you may wish to rethink that or re read my point. Working directly for and assisting the advertising of a scam is never going to be win win. Well perhaps for the scammer and campaign manger. Undeniable 3. Your 3rd point has some small value, in that if DT's are claiming it is sensible or plausible or improbable this is not yobit but rather some unsuspecting 3rd party using yobits services??? and no action can be taken UNTIL after this has been PROVEN. Then all other members and projects must be treated in the same way. PROOF of scamming first before action. That is NOT how they operate. If any of those points need clarification then please ask. Again clear double standards... IF they are getting paid YOU NEED PROOF of scam or connection to scammer. IF they are NOT getting paid you need ZERO proof and will get a scam tag for promoting a POSSIBLE scam. There is no other way to see it. Yobit needs to bring online all coins that have working wallets else it is a scam site. There is no excuse for having wallets offline that have had working wallets for years and devs asking them to upgrade, these are NOT small projects in many cases. This is disgraceful. If they do that then to me they will not be a scam site and should be allowed to advertise as any other project here. There are worse scamming sites for sure. This bullshit we have to save the board from spamming so now we can work with and be paid by scams is bogus. Undeniable. This is more of a gripe about double standards than picking out yobit or this other new " unrelated" forum. Yobit could still improve their performance and bring all wallets back online that have active devs and working wallets? get on with it or be banned from this forum. No more ripping traders off by capturing their coins is a nose diving market you have created yourselves. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
