reserved

A UNION TO ENSURE THE FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT OF ALL MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD (and nothing more)


"The union for the fair treatment of all members"

This post is worth a look too https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988.0


We notice already the usual scammers (lauda et al) and others are using mental gymnastics and super weak sauce bullshit to LEMON flag those they were punishing for whistle blowing them under the OLD gamed trust system. Yet don't have any flags themselves for observably trying to scam people or KNOWINGLY supporting scammers themselves. Many have some very serious observable instances of financially motivated wrong doing. There are several DT members that have some VERY STRONG cases against them for being involved in financially motivated shady behaviors.

The great thing about this new FLAG system is a UNION can work this time at pushing for transparent, fair and equal treatment for all members. This time the gamed and broken merit system can NOT prevent JUSTICE.

We will not accept double standards any longer. They can not SCAM people then punish us for daring to mention they did it!! can they?

NOW WE MUST BE CAREFUL. - we are not here to protect scammers or those that try to scam others. We should never protect any person that has presented a clear financial threat to other people here. We do not want to discredit this union. We protect the innocent and clearly abused that is all. If you are a scammer do NOT seek the support of this union.


Do you have a trust flag raised or red trust (old system) against you that is unfair? have you never scammed or acted in a way it is clear that you are intending to scam someone?

Present your case here on this thread.


TO BE PROTECTED BY THIS UNION YOU WILL NEED TO HAVE SUPPORTED OTHER MEMBERS. THIS IS NOT A ONE WAY STREET.  


1. Spread the word about this union.
2. Check back at least 1x per week to support flags and recommend to us new flags.




Once we build critical levels of support (it will take time) we will focus on ways to right the wrongs of the OLD trust feedback system and the implications of that old system for all members here.

Theymos has done ALL that he can to now present a fair set of transparent rules from a top down approach. We have to use these tools, but they can only work against a present gang if we work as a united effort. Put aside your personal gripes with each other over petty arguments and ego battles. Time to bring fair and equal treatment and opportunities to the entire board.

Our goals are not only to ensure fair use of the trust system, but fair opportunities to be ensured to all members here based on their merit (NOT WHO THEY KNOW AND WHO'S ASS THEY KISS).  There will be no hiding behind gamed merit scores and trust abuse.

Weight of numbers can crush ALL injustice here. The bitcointalk gravy train is coming to a stop soon for these scumbags that have been riding it for far too long.

This is a work in progress - it will take time to correct the entrenchment of these dirt bags. Even theymos seems to have only just realized that if you threaten to bring fair standards and  take away their UNFAIR advantages, they will turn on you and back stab you in an instant. Even those you thought were EXCELLENT members and here for the good of this movement. Red pill time.

We can not raise any concerns without observable instances, we can defend no concerns where there is observable instances of prior financially motivated wrongdoing or clear indication that financial wrong doing was being set up/planned.

Set up your flags or present flags where you have been abused. Let's review them together.

Any person that is demonstrated to have previously scammed or directly supported their scamming can not apply to be part of the union or benefit from its protection. Their posts will be deleted as we see them.

This initial post will be amended and altered as issues arise that cause extra wording to ensure our goals of fair treatment for all members are met.


Any person that we consider is trying to be deliberately net negative towards the ends of this union will be deleted and banned from this thread. Those include known trust abusers and scammers and their supporters.


THIS WILL TAKE TIME IT IS NOT AN IMMEDIATE FIX. When we reach critical mass to overturn observable trust abuse it will become a hugely effective tool.  

From our own research on the internet under your name there does seem to be quite a lot of credibility to several instances within those claims about you. Which is far more worrying in your case than in QS's.

@nutildah most of your post is presenting one sided KNOWN associates and supporters of those the observable instances of clear undeniable wrong doing reference. That along with the FACT you are willing to facilitate scamming for 0.3BTC means the reader should totally strike or investigate VERY THOROUGHLY the misleading information you are trying to present here.

I would certainly trust QS in a financial transaction over these other 2 members.

Vod would perhaps dox you, and depending on who you are you could have far far more to worry about.

Nutildah is broke and begging for 0.02btc loans and has previously BY HIS OWN WORDS demonstrated he will certainly not mind to facilitating scams for 0.3BTC.

Imagine sending him 0.3BTC  upfront............BOOM that is likely to be the last you see of him. He may throw in a free account? if you want the account of someone like that.

If he didn't keep poking his scam facilitating nose into other peoples business, then we would not have to keep informing the reader of this background to give them opportunity to reach the optimal opinion of these matters.

As we have said before laudas own probable extortion and shady looking escrow is NOTHING TO THE PROVEN scamming we have demonstrated he is capable of before. That is iron clad evidence of the danger he represents the other instances are just what you would expect from this scum bag.

Nutildah trying to discredit this kind of warning about proven scammers is WORRYING.

Why would you not want a valid warning for newbies regarding these types of members that are directly related to financial wrongdoing nutildah?

We strongly believe the is credible and verifiable evidence to warrant a warning on most persons NUTILDAH is trying to get off the hook here.

Theymos has proven he has true satoshi like intentions for this movement and was a good choice to be the warden of this board.
He may have made some strange and worrying systems of control and we may have been highly critical of those systems. This is not important now. We believe these were likely unintended outcomes, not foreseen.

So long as he has the true intention of ensuring that all members here are treated equally then we support him 100%, and hope he had an EXCELLENT BIRTHDAY.

If it was not theymos's birthday it does not matter, it was a day worthy of great celebration. It was the birthday of the first big step for free speech and fair treatment of all members of this board.

I don't think that would be accepted as evidence they lost money would it?

We need to keep quite strict about this kind of thing else we will end up with the same bunch of trust abusers using all kinds of mental gymnastics and new accounts to create flags for lemons and imaginary losses they didn't have to suffer themselves or didn't really happen at all.

You would surely need to provide some evidence that exists on this board that you were a victim of a SCAM.

We have a nice shiny flag (started by a proven scammer lauda and supported by his usual gang of asskissing wretches and a retarded mental case timelord ) using some mental gymnastics to say we are HIGHLY DANGEROUS TO PEOPLE MONEY HERE AND WE CANT WAIT TO SCAM THEM OUT OF ALL THEIR BITCOINS  when we have never dealt or mentioned or traded for goods or money here ever.

We don't mind the immediate and observable clear abuse of the LEMONS FLAG which we are pleased has limited damage to a NON SCAMMING account for daring to mention the the truth here, but to allow such flagrant and obvious abuse of stronger flags is something WE HOPE the bullies will not stop THEYMOS acting on and blacklisting these pieces of untrustworthy scum.

+

LOL nobody would waste time with your collateral. I mean those begging for 0.02btc loans don't have much to lose   anyway since you will not be able to demonstrate we have any other agenda than pushing for A TRANSPARENT SET OF FAIR RULES THAT ENSURE EACH MEMBER IS TREATED EQUALLY ... you need not worry yourself about it. haha

Nem stake holder lol - come on man what happened? I allow this off topic indulgence to hear how you reduced a possible 300btc to dust.

No you did not. What is our end goal? Because if you can demonstrate it is anything other than an environment that is based upon a transparent set of fair rules than ensure all members are treated equally. Then you can ask us for a 0.02btc loan in future.

But then others will be able to compete in terms of number of words if not with the reason and logic that allows them to flow so rapidly and with such strength. You will do well to find an instance where our central point has been clearly debunked. Meta board is excellent fun. We though welcome the days where we can discuss more positive things together rather than demonstrating most people frequenting this tiny sub board are power hungry greedy scum bags that don't mind destroying other peoples accounts to ensure they cream off the best financial deals here.

The new flag system is excellent. Even if the Lemons flag is a little weak. We only hope theymos is not pushed back further by the bullies here. Our next plan is to invite a lot of older legends from the alts boards to join here.  We need to raise the bar here. Too many fragile minds ready to snap like twigs and then become angry and bitter like suchmoron or moronbozo or lauda or well it would be easier to name those that are even really a slight challenge to debate with. There are but a handful of members I guess.

Meta we notice guides this forum quite heavily. It would be better to fill meta with more suitable and capable minds. You may start noticing a few new members appearing here that are going to raise the standards of debate to a level that makes them more interested and less of a slagging match centered around false allegations, wild speculation and spew from weak and dull minds. Some have a nice command of the English language but that flowery veneer is soon peeled back to reveal the disappointment beneath. Kind of like those teenagers that fix a big exhaust pipe to their grandmothers old car. You turn to view the exotic sports automobile roaring up the street,  and you see the black smoking, pathetic example of 20 year old ghetto level transportation crawling along. Same thing.

Anyway, back on topic.  So these are all flag level 1 if you are not effected by them personally right? so it ranges from LEMONS to lies and scamming that nearly cost the board a $ 2 000 000 000 dollar compensation offer. Seems a very broad range.

@nutildah

Yes, frustratingly similar are we not. Almost as if I has to be the same person publishing from both accounts. Yet there could be several explanations that would account for it all. Perhaps ALL will be revealed at the right time.

Now stay on topic please. You simply can not contain yourself can you our EVIL scam facilitating broke ass little friend. Do you need another 0.02BTC loan?  What on earth happened to your NEM stake? you blew 300BTC already? or lauda took it when you were bent over in front of him.

Now look we must stay on topic? can you do so?

No theymos is NOT a liar. He is simply making a best guess based on the server side information we intended him to have. Theymos though is incorrect. If we wanted him to have at hand the same information as you and nothing more we would have used tor browser and made a few other changes too. It in unusual for theymos to intercede and attempt to out a member as an ALT in public when not called upon to do so, or not involving any scams. However we wanted to present a small test. As we say the result was a little disappointing but then we are not among the very most popular with admins because they do not understand we want the same thing. A transparent set of rules that ensure the fair and equal treatment of all members. So we did not become too upset over it.

That is good. As intended. You should not think too much you are likely to start feeling discomfort and frustration.

No we think at these early stages some precedents that are commonly agreed on should be discussed.
No we think that meta is best and that people should make an effort to stay on topic and relevant to the questions in the OP of their own volition. So please do so. Trying to attack us on every thread does nothing only to reflect poorly and ensure the board is littered with examples of your own scam facilitating for payment behavior, that is there as PROOF, not speculation.

We will not raise a flag for you at this stage but please refrain from these weak sauce off topic attacks lacking proof or any real relevance when you are dealing with observable instances that are verifiable independently  and require no trust of ourselves nor our motives. Just tell yourself we the true legend if that makes you happier. We like to indulge those fantasies.

we are saying theymos does NOT have video evidence nor proof that our account is operated by the same person that operated the cryptohunter account. YES!! you are getting it our EVIL SCAM FACILITATING IMBECILE.

He has access to server side information that it was intended he should have to see what would happen. It was disappointing but still he seems to have more than made up for it of late. You have not heard of tor browser we take it? LOL .. theymos is not magic you do understand that? or perhaps he is here with us right now with his video camera. Perhaps WE ARE THEYMOS? have you considered that?

Either way please stay on topic. We have PROOF. You have NADA. You have what it was intended you have. Like the person trying to hide would come here all calling the same pet names and going after the same people. LOL  

All may be revealed in time. Then you may all look even more foolish.

Get back to begging for 0.02btc loans like you were just a few months ago and stop derailing our thread. Stick to answering the questions directly posed in the OP.

"nobody lurks since" "everyone knows" "theymos said" " I will help scam people for 0.3 btc"  please stop looking silly now and stay on topic.

LOL 2013 - suchnoobs

Why ask a question we have answered you before ...just for back ground on this false accuser who has no PROOF there can be many explanations for whatever compilation of intentional goodies we are giving you all to frustrate you further.

How do you know we have not been lurking since 2010? that is right you do NOT. Like you do NOT have video evidence the member that operated the cryptohunter account is operating this account.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5127540.msg50571141#msg50571141
You have no PROOF.

We have proof that you will willingly and knowingly facilitate scamming for 0.3 btc and you actually confess that you are EVIL.

WHY SHOULD ANYONE LISTEN TO SOMEONE EVIL who for 0.3btc will help scammers scam other members??

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134507.msg50719875#msg50719875

this is a good point i need to put up a flag clarification scenario for someone who says they want to facilitate scamming for 0.3btc and is EVIL. thanks for reminding me.

Now keep on topic please we are discussing the question posed in the initial post.

@qwk (what does it mean anyway?)

please don't be deliberately ignorant. "DEMANDING" then going on to say I don't like it done in private should have been done publicly. Trying to spin it as a negative sneaky action not just on the basis of spamming. If the train-man demands....then it happens. It was a request. If he wanted it kept secret he would not have sent to 110 members. Suchmoon to react like this is simply another indication lauda is an alt of suchmoon. She will deny it but I would bet she gets many exclusion inclusion suggestions from other  members.

The reader can see what is really going on. This acceptance by you of ONLY 100% irrefutable (even by crazy ludicrous lengths of unbelievable excuses or explanations being given consideration and weighted far more than any normal person would allow) FACT is bogus. Even when you spot there that denial is just looking silly, you say you don't care about the truth. This means it is pointless to try to convince you of something you do not want to accept. You just will not operate under what are generally considered the accepted rules of reasoned debate.

Anyway going off topic towards the end but this thread is bogus.

Anyway fine you will be qwk from now on. I thought the letters QWK represented words.

Even if your first assertion is possibly true. Not that we are an alt of anyone. That is merely a poor reflection on this state of the trust system. Why should one asking such questions be at risk of getting negative trust. So unless you have video evidence of another member posting on this account why bother considering it? what relevance does it have to the initial post. The answers should be the same if any of those questions was asked by ANY other member.

Allowing whistle blowers to be given scam tags is the very reason a sensible person may decide to use a shield here. Stop the abuse and REALLY blacklist abusers and no need for shields.

Please tell theymos to delete the entire trust system them and just put a message on every ones account " this person is possibly going to scam you as soon as they can"

To prove someone is lying you need to prove.

1. they 100% irrefutably presenting incorrect information.
2. They are 100% irrefutably doing so knowingly.

Present your evidence now then. Let's see it. No more bullshit someone did this , someone did that. Then no observable instance that meets the above 2 criteria.

After you have done so then you will be given another example that will be even stronger evidence of a lie and you better be prepared to open a flag for that because that was not a petty bullshit "lie" or joke "lie" like if you said you were slim and hot ... it was FOR DIRECT FINANCIAL GAIN AND SCAMMING. SCAMMING PEOPLE OUT OF MONEY IS WHAT WE ARE PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH.

If you flag one person you must flag them all if they meet the same threshold or that is DOUBLE STANDARDS.

WRONG - this is a vindictive thread from a clearly double standards back stabbing untrustworthy member. The reader needs to clearly have access to all the observable instances so they can make the optimal decision of whether to support or deny the flag.
If i say people are vindictive, have an ulterior motive and they have double standards the reader deserves to have access to the observable instances to know these are not false accusations.

To support disciplinary action one must have context to judge the CORRECT SUITABLE action is being taken. NO one rule for my friends one rule for everyone else. WE WANT THINGS FAIR AND CONSISTENT - NO MORE DOUBLE STANDARDS

The reader should also be privy to this observable instance

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5136759.0

Notice the person meriting suchmoons motivated attack? yes the person that has admitted he is simply the mouth piece LAUDA bullies around.  Of course he will be doing his best to deprive the reader of the optimal level of back ground information to be able to decide optimally how to vote on QS flag.

If you allow double standards on this board then freedom of speech is vulnerable. If you can be punished for actions a gang gets away with it is all over here.  Punish one person then punish all persons that meet the same threshold of apparent untrustworthy behavior.

This is suggesting selective punishment for lesser crimes by QS  than suchmoons friends/alts are guilty of. NOT APPROPRIATE.

This appears to be a vindictive attack on QS merely because he has presented some observable instances that cast suchmoon, and suchmoons possible alt lauda in a bad light.

I would not recommend to any reader that they endorse this action against QS without first examining this page which demonstrates the escrow attempt by suchmoons friends/alt lauda and his pals which QS was first to warn the board about.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153864.0

Also regarding another observable instance QS revealed with suchmoons other friend hhampuz looking like he perhaps stole 0.5btc

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5147938.0

Compared to suchmoons other friends/alts we do no think you should endorse any action against QS without endorsing action against lauda and hhmpuz

This is merely a thread to try to discredit his legitimate criticism of them and the observable instances he provided for the board.

Things must be taken in context. Also motive should be a consideration. We see that when you consider both of these if lauda and hhampuz are not flagged then QS should not be either.

This is clear double standards from suchmoon she is not encouraging flag support for lauda or hhampuz and their offences appear more serious by far.

Be very CAUTIOUS of people pushing clear double standards now. These people are highly untrustworthy. All members here deserve to be held to the SAME TRANSPARENT AND FAIR RULES EQUALLY. No gang tactics pushing their own personal agendas.

Suchmoon recently even made an attack ( in the form of suggesting he was sneaky and underhanded) on THEYMOS the owner of this board because he merely asked if DT members would consider excluding her friend/alt from lauda the proven scammer and liar from the TRUST SYSTEM.

Investigate everything that we have presented here to see if it is true or not.

Do not investigate suchmoon herself too much, because if you locate a picture of her you will not be sleeping for weeks....we don't mean in a good way either.

but then you took it away via non transparent means with no explanation at all? that is shady

Now you are just laudas bitch and also a trust abuser. When you line up all of your recent actions

1. refusal to be transparent regarding your campaign selection/refusal
2. supporting a dox and risking the boards money and the safety of the boards treasurer
3. Trust abusing people
4. apparently stealing 0.5btc from a project?

then we can see that QS does not look so bad in comparison to you does he?  you are fortunate that QS has not started a flag for you hhampuz because that would seem to be perhaps worthy of a higher flag level than his own.

To be fair QS escrowing "danger" seems less worrying that laudas own escrowing debacle.

Let's keep it this way.

All DT1 members that have not excluded someone with this much dirt hanging over them

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5153864.0

should have been excluded and painted up red a long time by any RESPONSIBLE and TRUSTWORTHY DT member. All the ass felching gimps and greedy scum that ride the lauda gravy train need to be pushed off.

This thread seems to have served its purpose well.

1. Reveals suchmoon as a back stabber and possible alt of lauda.
2. Reveals theymos is already unwilling to push DIRECT BLACKLISTING of lauda even after he immediately gave the new rules the same abuse he did the old rules.
3. Reveals theymos is too nice to people that stab him in the back and try to twist and spin his very kind action of just keeping lauda out of DT by the normal exclusion process rather than hand him a bitch slap black list directly for the board to rejoice and gloat in laudas face  is being spun into somehow theymos is the bad guy here for trying to keep a PROVEN scammer and PROVEN trust abuser out of the trust system.

Let's lock the thread. It's not like you don't ALL send PM's recommending who to remove and who to exclude on DT. What a bunch of hypocritical and backstabbing pieces of shit you all turn into when your ABUSING POWERS are threatened.

Disgusting.

QWK has previously stated

1. He is not interested in the truth ?

2. He feels it is good that innocent members are given red trust because it increases awareness of scamming

or some such madness. We should not be taking what qwk says at face value.  He said when lauda tells him to buy him a amazon gift voucher he just does it?  

The guy is certainly smarter than most of you low functioning dregs on meta,  but is operating completely independently from the morals and reasoning patterns with regard honest and dishonest or right vs wrong ..that 99.99% of other human beings accept as normal and reasonable.  Again not a person you want on DT.

His critical words about theymos are therefore again to be treated with extreme caution and investigated thoroughly before accepting them as TRUE.

This thread rather than casting any doubt on theymos who send this to 110 people so certainly not a sneaky attempt but rather again another example of theymos being too nice and too lenient when it comes to dealing directly with scammers , liars and their gang of corrupt scumbag pals.

Just to get a rough idea of how to set up my flags. With some examples of scenarios

1.  lauda, owlcatz , tman - extortion attempt which many senior members believe WAS a real attempt to extort another member

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

2. laudas et als shady looking escrow dealings concerning 3000BTC

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4895354.msg44083126#msg44083126

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

3. laudas PROVEN lie for financial gain (SCAMMING) that he was on the launch of xcoin/dark and there was NO Instamine whilst holding bags of it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.msg6748208#msg6748208

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

4. lauda et al's flagrant and continued trust abuse and giving out red trust to persons that presented observable instances of his past here.

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?


Local rule - you must give a sensible reasoned answer with some grounding based on the new flags rules

5. Nutildah knowingly by his own words trying to or succeeding at  facilitating scams for a payment of 0.3BTC

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134507.msg50719875#msg50719875

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that ws not directly effected?

So you are admitting you can not present anything. Look at the state of these latest lauda feltchers. We miss suchslob at least she put up a reasonable fight before being crushed and destroyed in public.

These new goons have nothing? they just refuse to even put up a fight they just roll over and start out with other accusations that will fold under scrutiny.

The important thing with the new system is the enforcement. Come on theymos lets start off as we mean to go on.

Are you going to black list these 4 morons or is a type 1 flag going to be the Lemons flag now?

Should have blacklisted lauda the moment he said fuck off to the new rules and trust abused the new flags. All this work and it will all go down the lemons rabbit hole if it is not enforced.

Give us the blacklisting button if you will not use it. We will be using it immediately on lauda and these 3 other abusers. What is their excuse now? how many lives does this cat have?