Everyone is always talking about how free speech is supposedly so carefully protected here, but when it is an unpopular opinion everyone has no problem joining a mob to try to destroy peoples reputations in order to stop them from speaking.
Free speech unless I disagree with it, then it's a "mob" trying to destroy reputations. exactly ^  I like Tecshare and all, but gotta agree with this. Tecshare has a serious problem with people stating their opinions. Armis, he gave negative feedback to for posting his opinion, got removed from trusts lists for it. Calls staff posting their opinions coercion. Calls people calling out WC a mob and tries to belittle them in any way possible. Your right, I am such a bully being one man being attacked by dozens of people at once. BTW in case you haven't noticed I haven't used the trust system to fight any battles related to this, but don't let that mess up your attempt at discrediting me. BTW how does me pointing out the mob harassment activity count as me stopping free speech. I am interested to hear how me having an opinion some how stops other people from having opinions. P.S. funny how all these new accounts have opinions about me all of a sudden. I agree, there are an unusually large number of newer accounts participating in both this thread, as well as the many WoodCollector threads. This fact tends to discredit all sides. I would also say that it is very concerning that Nubbins is giving negative trust to people who are supporting WoodCollector in any way. I do think WoodCollector is a scammer, however that should not prevent people from speaking their opinion that they think he is honorable or otherwise not a scammer. This is essentially what Nubbins is doing, he is giving negative trust to almost anyone who supports WoodCollector, which puts fear into anyone who is considering to support him. I do believe that Nubbins did not previously know how to properly use the trust system, I would still say that he is abusing it by installing fear into anyone who has an opposing opinion then him. I do think he should be given the opportunity to learn how the trust system works, however I do think he has received that opportunity and has still not changed his ways. There is no reason why people should not be able to freely speak their minds without fear of having their account ruined with a "Warning: trade with extreme caution" tag attached to their account just because they have opposing view of someone who happens to be in the default trust network. +1 - He left me trust saying i was either a sock or a moron.... If that is not abusing the trust system what is? Well I personally think you are likely a sockpuppet of WoodCollector however there is honestly not evidence to support as much, there fore negative trust is not appropaite |
|
|
|
Everyone is always talking about how free speech is supposedly so carefully protected here, but when it is an unpopular opinion everyone has no problem joining a mob to try to destroy peoples reputations in order to stop them from speaking.
Free speech unless I disagree with it, then it's a "mob" trying to destroy reputations. exactly ^ I like Tecshare and all, but gotta agree with this. Tecshare has a serious problem with people stating their opinions. Armis, he gave negative feedback to for posting his opinion, got removed from trusts lists for it. Calls staff posting their opinions coercion. Calls people calling out WC a mob and tries to belittle them in any way possible. Your right, I am such a bully being one man being attacked by dozens of people at once. BTW in case you haven't noticed I haven't used the trust system to fight any battles related to this, but don't let that mess up your attempt at discrediting me. BTW how does me pointing out the mob harassment activity count as me stopping free speech. I am interested to hear how me having an opinion some how stops other people from having opinions. P.S. funny how all these new accounts have opinions about me all of a sudden. I agree, there are an unusually large number of newer accounts participating in both this thread, as well as the many WoodCollector threads. This fact tends to discredit all sides. I would also say that it is very concerning that Nubbins is giving negative trust to people who are supporting WoodCollector in any way. I do think WoodCollector is a scammer, however that should not prevent people from speaking their opinion that they think he is honorable or otherwise not a scammer. This is essentially what Nubbins is doing, he is giving negative trust to almost anyone who supports WoodCollector, which puts fear into anyone who is considering to support him. I do believe that Nubbins did not previously know how to properly use the trust system, I would still say that he is abusing it by installing fear into anyone who has an opposing opinion then him. I do think he should be given the opportunity to learn how the trust system works, however I do think he has received that opportunity and has still not changed his ways. There is no reason why people should not be able to freely speak their minds without fear of having their account ruined with a "Warning: trade with extreme caution" tag attached to their account just because they have opposing view of someone who happens to be in the default trust network. Thank you, that was probably the first on topic post in the last 5 pages. Your welcome. i also messaged Canary to at least look at my post and to plead with him to make his trust network be made up of people who have more experience trading, and detecting scams, as opposed to people who he simply has traded with one time. |
|
|
|
Everyone is always talking about how free speech is supposedly so carefully protected here, but when it is an unpopular opinion everyone has no problem joining a mob to try to destroy peoples reputations in order to stop them from speaking.
Free speech unless I disagree with it, then it's a "mob" trying to destroy reputations. exactly ^ I like Tecshare and all, but gotta agree with this. Tecshare has a serious problem with people stating their opinions. Armis, he gave negative feedback to for posting his opinion, got removed from trusts lists for it. Calls staff posting their opinions coercion. Calls people calling out WC a mob and tries to belittle them in any way possible. Your right, I am such a bully being one man being attacked by dozens of people at once. BTW in case you haven't noticed I haven't used the trust system to fight any battles related to this, but don't let that mess up your attempt at discrediting me. BTW how does me pointing out the mob harassment activity count as me stopping free speech. I am interested to hear how me having an opinion some how stops other people from having opinions. P.S. funny how all these new accounts have opinions about me all of a sudden. I agree, there are an unusually large number of newer accounts participating in both this thread, as well as the many WoodCollector threads. This fact tends to discredit all sides. I would also say that it is very concerning that Nubbins is giving negative trust to people who are supporting WoodCollector in any way. I do think WoodCollector is a scammer, however that should not prevent people from speaking their opinion that they think he is honorable or otherwise not a scammer. This is essentially what Nubbins is doing, he is giving negative trust to almost anyone who supports WoodCollector, which puts fear into anyone who is considering to support him. I do believe that Nubbins did not previously know how to properly use the trust system, I would still say that he is abusing it by installing fear into anyone who has an opposing opinion then him. I do think he should be given the opportunity to learn how the trust system works, however I do think he has received that opportunity and has still not changed his ways. There is no reason why people should not be able to freely speak their minds without fear of having their account ruined with a "Warning: trade with extreme caution" tag attached to their account just because they have opposing view of someone who happens to be in the default trust network. |
|
|
|
Can I suggest you to remove the " new rules" tag? You can put it again when u decide to update the rules in the future
They had the previous rules in place for close to a year. The "new rules" are still very new to most people. To be honest, I would personally say that, for an entity that tends to not be very active (and cannot monitor their signature campaign very well) a pay per activity campaign would probably be better. I think many people thought that they were more "elegant" and were respected for the fact they had no post requirement and as a result people were not spamming with their signature. |
|
|
|
I am currently unable to withdraw from 796
1000 coins are not too big deal for 796. They've profited enough to cover this lost, even if the incident was true as announced. Do you have anything to back this up? My understanding is that 796 is not that large of an exchange which would imply that a 1,000 BTC loss would result in a large (probably >100%) percentage of their equity. |
|
|
|
I eventually hope to upgrade to m of n keys stored in 3 or more geographic locations. If more than one key needs to be compromised. looking into Tamper-evident seals may be something you want to consider.[/b] Video summary: if your are serious about tamper-evident seals, you should carefully check for tampering every time you break the seal. Very important point. The tamper evident seals is an excellent security precaution that I will add to my best practices thread. I don't see how tamper evident seals/bags are going to help anything. All that an attacker would need to do is break the seal, get the key, repeat until they have enough to sign a transaction and spend the unspent inputs to an address they 100% control. |
|
|
|
I would like to continue. 217 posts 1N9kf7KMD8iihwRXXFqg5ugT7oE1XvPFyD Thanks  |
|
|
|
Your loan is for ~$40 worth of bitcoin however the plan you say that you need costs only ~$30 per year. As mentioned in your trust reports a reasonable person would think that it would be best to stay away from loans for a while after what happened with your account the last time you took out a loan That's bullshit that wasn't my fault that was redsn0ws fault. How come I am getting the blame for something that he caused? It was his fault, but most people would think the experience would result in you wanting to avoid the lending scene for a while Why should it affect me? If it didn't happen this loan would be funded and I would be scott free This is so unfair I am saying that after your bad experience you would not want to be involved in any lending. The fact that you were taking out bigger loans each time you repaid the previous loan and now that you are taking out no collateral loan (verses using your account as collateral previously) doesn't smell right. Some may say that you are slowly building confidence in yourself to eventually take a very large unsecured loan and running away with it I do what I do to keep money rolling in an paying for hosting is one of them. I only needed this one and no more after this. The max I would be taking out without collateral is .2 as that is the max it would cost for hosting. If i wanted to do more confidence building I don't see why I wouldn't just jump straight to the big fish of account collateral and get a coin or two that doesn't make sense to me I don't think your account is worth anywhere near one or two bitcoin. The price appears to be closer to the .4 to .5 range. I am not sure why so many people were so quick to jump to be wiling to lend you so much more then that using your account as collateral. If you still need this then I can lend you .15 for up to a week with 10% interest assuming you can escrow your account with tomatocage. |
|
|
|
Your loan is for ~$40 worth of bitcoin however the plan you say that you need costs only ~$30 per year. As mentioned in your trust reports a reasonable person would think that it would be best to stay away from loans for a while after what happened with your account the last time you took out a loan That's bullshit that wasn't my fault that was redsn0ws fault. How come I am getting the blame for something that he caused? It was his fault, but most people would think the experience would result in you wanting to avoid the lending scene for a while Why should it affect me? If it didn't happen this loan would be funded and I would be scott free This is so unfair I am saying that after your bad experience you would not want to be involved in any lending. The fact that you were taking out bigger loans each time you repaid the previous loan and now that you are taking out no collateral loan (verses using your account as collateral previously) doesn't smell right. Some may say that you are slowly building confidence in yourself to eventually take a very large unsecured loan and running away with it |
|
|
|
Every account has a place in their profile for a BTC address, and many people have something in their signature that mentions they can send tips to a certain address if they liked their post.
As it was mentioned above, there is no real need to integrate a 3rd party app for any bitcoin payment, tipping included
There's likely 'no real need' for many things but it is a nice addition. How many people will actually boot up their wallet to copy and paste an address and send a tip here? A third party application just makes it more convenient and a bit of fun, not to mention you'll actually know where the money came from. I think it can also act as a nice 'plus 1' feature but one where people can actually reward with something of worth to show their appreciation. There are a lot of people on the forum that strongly believe that you should always 100% control the private keys to your bitcoin. Any tipping feature that is "on forum" would obviously not allow that. Some people could leave a tab open for their blockchain.info wallet, or could leave multibit open all the time. I really don't think copying and pasting an address is that big of a deal to someone when they care enough to be giving away money. Which is why addresses in profiles should be converted to bitcoin: hyperlinks and QR codes, no copy-pasta needed.
I think there was some kind of vulnerability a while back for people who had used "bitcoin:" links over a short period |
|
|
|
He said recently that all the false accusations were getting to him. He mentioned that since his RL identity is tied to his account anyone that knows him, or looks up his name will be able to find all the BS that people write about him.
Oh really? Where did he say this? Though I can understand the being tied to his real name thing. I wonder if his name being known was on purpose or was he doxxed at one point? Never a good idea to post personal stuff on here especially if you're a member like vod. Very easy for people to get grudges very fast especially when you bust their scams and rub them up the wrong way. He said it here. His username was actually changed a while back by theymos, it used to be something like mlawrence but since he was so active in busting scams that was too close to his real name for his comfort. He probably posted his dox/RL identity when it was not yet known just how popular this forum would be for scammers and before bitcoin became so successful. I am fairly certain that Vod has caused scammers to lose a lot of money at at time by foiling potential scammers, and as a result they really have it out for him |
|
|
|
|
Is this even allowed according to eBay rules? I mean if it is not then there is a chance that eBay would somehow restrict the account if they found out it was sold.
I don't think that even connecting to a local VPN gateway would help because I think they would find using a IP address masking VPN would in itself be suspicious to them
|
|
|
|
What is the official statement regarding the continuation of this signature campaign and the status of Cryptomine.io?
There is no official statement, Cryptomine ran off with their customers money. I am actually quite surprised that the OP actually ended up paying the members of this campaign. That really is the strangest piece of the puzzle. It was speculated that the OP is a purchased account, but I doubt it was worth so much that the operators of the cryptomine ponzi/scam would want to pay participants that much |
|
|
|
I was under the impression this was the status of the forum not even two weeks ago when there were 8+ threads open in meta about default trust, wanting Vod removed and wanting the trust system to be changed, along with multiple people trolling him from various angles.
I don't blame him for wanting to take a hiatus, his work here is really not appreciated by the people who he stops from getting scammed and the people he stops from scamming tend to hate him
I'm sure vod can handle the 'trolling' and likely doesn't let it get to him ultimately, but I can see how getting involved in this sort of stuff is distracting from his studies. Even being on the Internet isn't a good idea when you're studying as it's far too easy to just procrastinate. And something tells me vod doesn't need the appreciation but enjoys the scambusting anyway  (though maybe not when he's got better real world things to be doing). He said recently that all the false accusations were getting to him. He mentioned that since his RL identity is tied to his account anyone that knows him, or looks up his name will be able to find all the BS that people write about him. I wouldn't be surprised if it is somehow affecting his personal life/relationships. (I think this came up in the takigirl fiasco) |
|
|
|
Your loan is for ~$40 worth of bitcoin however the plan you say that you need costs only ~$30 per year. As mentioned in your trust reports a reasonable person would think that it would be best to stay away from loans for a while after what happened with your account the last time you took out a loan That's bullshit that wasn't my fault that was redsn0ws fault. How come I am getting the blame for something that he caused? It was his fault, but most people would think the experience would result in you wanting to avoid the lending scene for a while |
|
|
|
Your loan is for ~$40 worth of bitcoin however the plan you say that you need costs only ~$30 per year. As mentioned in your trust reports a reasonable person would think that it would be best to stay away from loans for a while after what happened with your account the last time you took out a loan |
|
|
|
So you force investors to trust you with a minimum amount of money before you start to payout? Why don't they take heed to the warning: trade with extreme caution under your trust? |
|
|
|
We have a big pay 1.4 BTC to do and the list will continue going normal. Payments calmed down a bit more should increase soon. I'm campaigning on twitter and elsewhere, help us the more people participating more polls payments are made. Follow us https://twitter.com/Ponzi_GameI cannot seriously believe that there are enough suckers out there that you somehow received over 1.4 BTC from "investors" at one time. How much of that money is from your own money that you mixed prior to sending to that address? How many more of these ponzi scams are you personally behind? I know there were recently multiple ponzis that all collapsed at the same time (and were probably all run by the same person) |
|
|
|
location? if its the US not really worth it but id do the UK
It is in the US, more specifically in New York, more specifically outside the courthouse where Ross is going to be tried. Anyone have any predictions of what his sentencing will be?
Probably not for a long time. I would guess he will be found guilty on at least the major counts and he will likely appeal on numerous grounds, probably ending up winning at least some of them which will lead to either a retrial or the case being thrown out completely. I wouldn't be surprised if this case ends up in the supreme court, at least once |
|
|
|
Hopefully you won't return to find the forums like this:  Jokes aside, good luck with your studies Vod, it sounds like you're making the right decison. The forum will be missing a valuable asset during your absence. I was under the impression this was the status of the forum not even two weeks ago when there were 8+ threads open in meta about default trust, wanting Vod removed and wanting the trust system to be changed, along with multiple people trolling him from various angles. I don't blame him for wanting to take a hiatus, his work here is really not appreciated by the people who he stops from getting scammed and the people he stops from scamming tend to hate him |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
