 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
|
But now who is promoting a well know ponzi/scam site?
oh, why didnt you guys make this clear from the begining, rating depends on how obvious it is that it is a ponzi |
|
|
|
I dont understand the reasoning here, - I get negative trust for promoting what you guys consider a ponzi
- Shorena advertises a scam
- he does get negative rep
+1 for favouritism, there is more than enough evidence here against shorena, who has doublebot scammed? I guess people here are afraid of people on DT . I strongly don't think he represents a threat of any kind (if anything, the contrary). but i pose some kind of threat? noted I dont understand the reasoning here, - I get negative trust for promoting what you guys consider a ponzi
- Shorena advertises a scam
- he does get negative rep
+1 for favouritism, there is more than enough evidence here against shorena, who has doublebot scammed? I guess people here are afraid of people on DT You are still promoting a ponzi/scam site , shorena ... no he is not promoting a scam. I think this is the simple difference between you and him. Pretty much this. I am happy to remove any negative trust I place when an issue is resolved - in this case when a person is no longer actively promoting a scam. he only left after he got signature payment and the campaign ended |
|
|
|
I dont understand the reasoning here, - I get negative trust for promoting what you guys consider a ponzi
- Shorena advertises a scam
- he does get negative rep
+1 for favouritism, there is more than enough evidence here against shorena, who has doublebot scammed? I guess people here are afraid of people on DT |
|
|
|
theymos restricted them due to abuse. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1172918.0You could ask a higher rank member to quote your post and then the image will show. Forgetting that you can wait until you're Junior Member and you will be able to post images. How many posts required to become junior member? you need 30 activity, it takes a while |
|
|
|
~snip~
Whether or not I was still wearing the signature at that time I dont know.
~snip~
I agreed to wear their signature for a months and I will honor my agreement. It was the day of the payout, the month was over. I dont know the exact time. News?
12 18 hours, payment received, thanks. do you remember now? |
|
|
|
~snip~
Whether or not I was still wearing the signature at that time I dont know.
~snip~
I agreed to wear their signature for a months and I will honor my agreement. |
|
|
|
shorena had made an argument defending his decision to keep his signature up (at the time) in that he believed that they were not a scam. In fact, he made such argument in a very post that you quoted, and such argument was the only thing that you sniped. lol when he posted that argument it was already discovered to be a scam for about ~4 days go back to the drawing board |
|
|
|
Why are you wasting your time being butthurt over this though? Simply remove the scam sig you have now and move on to another legitimate campaign - problem solved.
It is a little like wasting computer cycles on useless work.
you obviously dont care about justice, why should i switch to another campaign? he didnt |
|
|
|
Everyone makes mistakes though. If someone stops promoting obvious scams and no longer promotes or wears their signatures then I peronally wouldn't give them negative trust.
~snip~
OK, everyone makes mistakes.... but, when its some-one like shorena nothing gets done, he didnt stop and he wasnt given negative trust |
|
|
|
There is always a loser on ponzi and "doubling" sites. While it is permitted to advertise such sites here on the forum, why is it surprising that people that care about integrity give you negative feedback?
If a site promotes itself as ponzi and lets users know there's a big risk then I wouldn't say it's an obvious scam. It's doubtful and it's arguably untrustworthy but not an obvious scam. Promoting itself as "100% guaranteed" is definitely a scam. @EcuaMobi: Yes I kept wearing the signature after it turned out they skipped nonces. The full story is that they also repaid those affected by skipped nonces. Firstly only those that lost, but later everyone else. The story was that they hired a 3rd person that patched in the skipped nonces, did a mistakes as they did not review the code before it went live. I can look up the relevant threads later if you want. So you promoted it only when (at least you thought) it was just an error they were making and not and obvious scam? Yes I'd appreciate having the relevant threads please, it will save me some time. TBH I don't know about that case. But a dice site is not an obvious scam until proved otherwise. Did he promote it even after it was an obvious a proven scam? I see he updated a previous positive trust to neutral after the scam was found. On the other hand anything that "guarantees" always doubling your coins is an obvious scam. To make it short: promoting a known/obvious scam deserves negative trust. Therefore I'm adding negative trust to you now. If you can prove without any doubts shorena was promoting that dice site after the scam was proved above reasonable doubt then I'll add negative trust to him too. Sounds fair? further evidence here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=778953.0;allhis name was listed which proves he was still participating I know he was participating. What I don't know yet is if at that time it was an obvious scam or not. It was an obvious scam, the thread listed was only for those left in the campaign after it was discovered to be a scam tldr: no more signups will be accepted - this thread is only for me to pay out the escrowed coins I have for this month's campaignThis thread continues from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=776227The story so far: dicebitco.in escrowed 5 BTC with bitcoininformation and 5 BTC with me to cover their signature campaign for September. About a week in to September their site was found to be cheating some players, and everything blew up. Many suspect them of being scammers, they claim the cheat was put in place by a rogue employee. They asked bitcoininformation and I to pay out this month's campaign. Yesterday bitcoininformation paid out all coins due for the first 10 days of the campaign, using up most of the 5 BTC he was holding. He sent me the rest, and I will use that to pay out remaining coins owed at the end of the month. Here's a list of everyone who is still participating in the campaign. If you're not in the list but think you should be, please let me know. Also, if you rank up, let me know that too. Removed: | Username | Posts at start | Posts at 1st payment | Rank | Reason | | ----------------- | ------------------- | ---------------------------- | ------------ | ------------------- | | hdbuck | 1991 | 2071 | Senior | advertising for multiple campaigns at once (ASICMINER) | | dKingston | 290 | 311 | Senior | switched to cryptcominer | | DebitMe | 1136 | 1384 | Hero | switched to fortunejack | | DooMAD | 477 | 493 | Senior | switched to bitmixer | | beetcoin | 4499 | 4623 | Senior | blank signature | | pedrosoft | 485 | 509 | Senior | blank signature | | leancuisine | 1206 | 1215 | Senior | blank signature | | itsaj | 470 | 560 | Senior | switched to gawminers | | master-P | 627 | 694 | Senior | blank signature | | Vagnavs | 587 | 597 | Hero | switched to bitmixer |
as you can see, he didnt leave the campaign he stayed |
|
|
|
#1 this should be in reputation. no, has to do with default trust
#2 thanks quickseller for what? disregarding evidence and picking sides?
#3 thanks for giving me a chance to answer to the PM: you're welcome, i'm a pretty fair guy
No, the negativ rating is for promoting a ponzi. I will remove it if you remove the signature before you get paid. You probably just misread that. you didnt remove yours when you were promoting that scam, you waited for the money, why should I ?
#4 Again, I am not a God and I never claimed to be one. If you want to worship me, fine. I will probably not listen to your prayers though.
#5 The person that put me in this position is BadBear.
#6 I cant and I wont be able to go against all scams. Argueing why I dont go against something else you consider a scam is not helping you in discussion. Its not relevant. If you think there are known scams that needs tagging from someone from default trust. ~snip~
its not considered a scam, it is a scam
#7 My advertising for dicebitco.in has been explained at length. I might have been wrong about them, but to my knowledge they paid out everyone and closed shop. You might also notice that I still wear the rating I got for it. wrong
#8 When I had doubt about a casino I advertised for I left the campaign and waived payment. They turned out to be honest.
oh, when you have doubts you leave, but when its a proven scam you stay?
@EcuaMobi: Yes I kept wearing the signature after it turned out they skipped nonces. The full story is that they also repaid those affected by skipped nonces. Firstly only those that lost, but later everyone else. The story was that they hired a 3rd person that patched in the skipped nonces, did a mistakes as they did not review the code before it went live. I can look up the relevant threads later if you want.
@EcuaMobi as you said a few posts up, im waiting for you to -ve him
|
|
|
|
TBH I don't know about that case. But a dice site is not an obvious scam until proved otherwise. Did he promote it even after it was an obvious a proven scam? I see he updated a previous positive trust to neutral after the scam was found. On the other hand anything that "guarantees" always doubling your coins is an obvious scam. To make it short: promoting a known/obvious scam deserves negative trust. Therefore I'm adding negative trust to you now. If you can prove without any doubts shorena was promoting that dice site after the scam was proved above reasonable doubt then I'll add negative trust to him too. Sounds fair? further evidence here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=778953.0;allhis name was listed which proves he was still participating |
|
|
|
TBH I don't know about that case. But a dice site is not an obvious scam until proved otherwise. Did he promote it even after it was an obvious a proven scam? I see he updated a previous positive trust to neutral after the scam was found. On the other hand anything that "guarantees" always doubling your coins is an obvious scam. To make it short: promoting a known/obvious scam deserves negative trust. Therefore I'm adding negative trust to you now. If you can prove without any doubts shorena was promoting that dice site after the scam was proved above reasonable doubt then I'll add negative trust to him too. Sounds fair? this sounds fair User Profile: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=355700The discussion starts around here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=716312.msg8715769#msg8715769 Basic summary: A two part scamWebsite was caught skipping nonces to rig rolls. This would in effect allow them to maintain a 1% house edge profit for investors, thus attract more and more investments while allowing them to still skim the site investors of all legitimate profits made. Individual users such as stars have told me that they are owed 50+ coins.
Their defense:They claim that a new rogue developer they hired was rigging the rolls to scam them but around 2 days before the incident there is proof of them saying that the only people involved are the original two: https://i.imgur.com/SJvuc1Q.png (refutes their argument) Example of one of the scams:User stars was scammed 60+ coins according to Dooglus: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=716312.msg8721251#msg8721251As a result of this around 4000-5000 coins have already been divested. 100s of coins are owed to people who placed wagers. They still appear to be honoring divestments though so I recommend divesting your funds for the time being. Update 1: chat on dicebitcoin is now disabled and they are refusing to return a lot of owed funds. Since this thread is used to give me negative trust by Ah, trade fortress, the beacon of morality  I will post my arguments here. ~~snip~~ I agreed to wear their signature for a months and I will honor my agreement. ok, you can add the negative to his profile now |
|
|
|
The only outcome that I see here is that you attract more attention to yourself and get more negative ratings. The trust rating is working as intended. You do realize OP that anyone is allowed to give you a negative if they don't trust you for any reason whatsoever? He is a mighty fighting keyboard warrior /s
Seems like the forum is full of mighty creations; we have wariors, a god, etc. It doesnt matter if i attract more attention to myself, if they give me negative rating, it would be only fair to give shorena the same as he did the same thing |
|
|
|
Have you considered removing the signature to the ponzi?
By advertising what is clearly a scam, you are potentially causing others to get scammed which makes you untrustworthy.
Shorena advertised a scam even after it was discovered to be a scam, but you didnt even even tag him with a neutral  ?is it because of his trust rating? are you intimidated? Yes, I am intimidated by Shorena. He is a mighty fighting keyboard warrior /s Can you stop joking, this is a serious matter, you give me negative trust for doing the same thing shorena did but you didnt even drop a neutral on shorena's page, on a serious level, why not put a rating on his page? OP so your point is that because you promote an obvious scam then shorena should receive negative trust and be removed from DT? Have you considered removing the signature to the ponzi?
By advertising what is clearly a scam, you are potentially causing others to get scammed which makes you untrustworthy.
Shorena advertised a scam even after it was discovered to be a scam, but you didnt even even tag him with a neutral ?is it because of his trust rating? are you intimidated? What scam exactly did shorena promote? this one https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=774120.0 |
|
|
|
Have you considered removing the signature to the ponzi?
By advertising what is clearly a scam, you are potentially causing others to get scammed which makes you untrustworthy.
Shorena advertised a scam even after it was discovered to be a scam, but you didnt even even tag him with a neutral ?is it because of his trust rating? are you intimidated? |
|
|
|
|
literally the shortest survey i've ever done, OP if you dont mind me asking, what is this survey for?
|
|
|
|
Shorena gave me negative trust for advertising a "ponzi" "knowingly" , who gave him the power to decide on wether or not people should have a bad reputation around here, where was God Shorena when that cloudmining website signature thing was happening? no-where , you know why? because if he tackled that campaign, he knew he was punching above his weight, so when doublebot pops up, he thinks its his chance, I dont understand this person's way of thinking, he did virtually the same thing about a year ago but people on default trust are too scared to tag him these are his points in why he is allowed to advertise a scam but other members arent allowed to because of their unworthiness (shorena thinks he is god) I will post my arguments here. I had coins invested with dicebitco.in and was able to completly divest and withdraw. people gamble on doublebot everyday, no-one had had any issues Manl and Gerry paid out everyone (to my knowledge) that lost coins. everyone is getting paid at double bot Those that have not been paid out are those that won coins. I think that is acceptable as they have more than they had before the incident and thus did not lose anything. While you can argue that the rolls are deterministic the gamblers are not, thus it makes no sense to argue in hindsight if and what they players would have risked would the nounces not have been skipped.
OH, they were scammed, but not scammed enough?
I agreed to wear their signature for a months and I will honor my agreement. so will I I can see that you and other DT members have "double standards"  |
|
|
|
|
OP nice script, would be nice if you posted a tutorial but i'll figure it out
|
|
|
|
|
