It’s good to know you believe it is okay for someone to selectively scam those who do business with you. This has been noted.

A review of the OP and the rules for DT, it appears you are right.

This appears to be a flaw in the logic of how DT1/2 voting works. 

No. if Lauda is excluded from DT1, he cannot be on DT2. I think your assumptions as to whose votes count might be flawed.

If you are on DT1, your trust list flows down regardless if your ratings show up or not.

Great! This is an appropriate change for the reasons I previously cited. It is also appropriate to blacklist him manually rather than let it happen over time also for the reasons cited previously, although he may have requested to be blacklisted.

What was the domain you were using?

Here is something crazy — perhaps Hhampuz saw what I was doing when I messaged the LiveCoin signature participants and saw that I really am looking out for others and for the good of the community.

Lol. You are removing your signature at the end of the day because their signature campaign is ending at that time and you will no longer be getting paid to advertise for them. Based on your recent posts, it is very clear that you would be more than happy to keep their signature on if the campaign would continue.

Do you have any update on your escrow agent confirming he is in fact holding signature campaign funds for you?

Thanks for doing the right thing.

The signature bearers are continuing to support LiveCoin via advertising their signature in exchange for payment.

Ideally, a reputable signature bearer would cease displaying their signature once they determine that LiveCoin has scammed at least one of their customers as is the case here.

I don’t think the signature campaign is going to end. Hhampuz needs the money too much to close the campaign down and LiveCoin wants the advertising. It appears there are enough people with positive reputation (on its face — this will likely change) who are willing to ignore the scam in return for the 0.02 they are receiving.

I think Salty said it pretty accurately

But, you know, facts don’t really matter. Do they?

It is clear that your opinion can be bought for something less than 0.02 btc/week. As such, it is worthless.

I don't find OgNasty to be controversial. In fact, the only controversial thing I can think of OgNasty ever doing is wearing a signature of a shady company for a couple of weeks that I don't believe had actually scammed anyone (but IIRC were operating in a very shady way). When OgNasty was 1 of ~10 DT1 members, he had excluded many people who were very high profile because they posted a lot, but had no real trading experience and had no business being on DT.

In regards to your point that theymos is not acting as a dictator, you fail to account for the fact that whoever controls the algorithm controls the output. He also has great influence on the inputs by controlling the merit sources and how much each source gets. When google doesn't want particular pages displayed prominently on their search results, they don't blacklist websites, they just tinker with the algorithm to get their desired results.

There are also many examples of people leaving many controversial ratings over time who are already on DT who see no real pushback against their ratings. There are also examples of people facing retribution in the form of frivolous negative ratings (bill gator), and trust exclusions (bill gator and teeGUMES) for making statements that goes against the "crowd".

In order for the trust system to have any credibility, there needs to be rules (some of which were recently implemented with the flag system), and they need to be enforced (which does not appear to be the case). When the system is not being used appropriately, there needs to be intervention, period. If there is no intervention, those who speak out will see mass exclusions, and others will see this and be afraid to speak out. Without intervention, the forum will become more like most countries in the Middle east, China, or North Korea, in which citizens are jailed when they are critical of the government.

I don't think there is escrow. I would recommend against joining at this time.

First, if you are not familiar with the thread and situation, I don't see how it would possibly be appropriate to have a stance on the flag one way or another.

---

The evidence is in this post.


I have copied a portion of the screenshot linked in the above referenced post. If you review the screenshot, you will see that bob123 said he will buy [url=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659] Ntrain2k upon receiving a PM from the account. You can see in the below image that bob123 received a PM from ntrain2k:

You can see above the copied portion of the conversation that bob123 was offered a "green hero" for $550, and also that bob123 asked for PMs to be sent to "alice321" which they were.

Further, you can see this portion of the conversation posted by bob123:

Above you can see that bob123 agreed to purchase a legendary account for $600 upon receiving a PM from the account. You can see from the above screenshot of PMs posted by bob123 that a PM was sent from narousberg, which is a legendary account.

Further, you can see based on bob123's actions that he did not have any intention of actually buying the accounts up for sale, despite making the representation that he wishes to do so, which is a breach of an implied agreement.

I would have to scrutinize the details further to find additional agreements that bob123 broke, however the above more than demonstrates a breach of agreement(s), and as such proves the flag is valid. 

As an update, I have received no response from game-protect, even though he has posted since I sent my PM.

Also:

How is this anything other than being insolvent?

lobcmt2 has sent tbct_mt2 2 merit in as many transactions
motienvolam has sent lobcmt2 a single merit

Unless there is evidence they are sending merit via intermediaries, and I don't think there is, although I have not looked closely at this possibility, I don't think they are sending merit to eachother in any amounts that I would care about.

Each of these people has received a small number of merit from many people, with each receiving approximately two merit (+-0.75 merit) from each person who sent them merit.

I am still interested to learn about the “subpar thread creation” method to receive merit.

lol, probably not.

Personally doubt she actually wants to survive far into the primary season, let along become president (although they said the same thing about Trump). I suspect her campaign, and appearance on the debate stage was a way to sell books, and I would not be surprised if she book sales ticked noticeably up after the debates.