|
921
|
Economy / Reputation / Re: Little Mouse and RapTarX - What is this connection?
|
on: February 28, 2020, 10:05:25 PM
|
I don't know who is Little Mouse.
I don't know... Although I am from Bangladesh
 6. Bangladesh has no suppoters, Little Mouse disappeared and came back yesterday.
Little Mouselet's see if @Little Mouse have missed the pool or not
Little MouseWeb wallets are risky. It's not all about being scammed. A simple mistake of the authority may feel you bored. I'm agreed with Little Mouse, we must have controll over our fund. It doesn't look like "you don't know who Little Mouse is". There is probably 1 good reason why Little Mouse did what he did: fucked with accounts. Unless you claim Little Mouse tried to frame you? OH: mdayonliner 4:48:15Little Mouse 05:00:24mdayonliner 05:01:36Previously mdayonliner replied to S_Therapist
On side note, retardation level on this forum is becoming quite disturbing. Just look at this spammer: It is possible it was just a sloppy copy and paste job.
oh, spamming in reputation, please go to meta to talk about merits: But IMO this is just as @TECHSHARE reiterated, a sloppy job of copy and paste.
Going to edit this.Mr. Archie Pena, why this user said you are his banned alt account CoinMenX? What happened to the same-twitter-account-connection bounty post? Funny actually, I will sound like Timelord now, but last time CoinMenX logged in:  RapTarX registered account on:  Logical explanation? |
|
|
|
|
922
|
Economy / Reputation / Ree @hacker1001101001 ICO bump account
|
on: February 28, 2020, 07:07:58 PM
|
Red herring.
[...]
More red herrings.
I am not quite sure why you attacked suchmoon, but "if you don't confess I will publish your dox" is?
it was when I was a newbie here
He was the person who is the part of the process who dragged me to Bitcointalk explicitly.
But you see, account hacker1001101001 was registered on June 05, 2017 and account poochpocket on March 29, 2014 and you also said... I don't control any other account than this on the forum now
..and today you said... Yes, the account is in control of me.
..did you buy this account? Since when is this account under your control? |
|
|
|
|
924
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
|
on: February 28, 2020, 03:40:02 PM
|
@OP just to let you know that some Objective Standards Guild members don't agree with you nor this guild's standards at all: Bro, I see you are not in DT1 anymore, its just because you removed your trust list. The criteria is you should have a costume trust list to be included in DT1  Your feedbacks seems like a very good warning for some community members to avoid spams and you deserve a DT1 position I think. Still if you don't want to be there please at least keep up with a DT2 position. It would help large number of newbies to get your important posted feedbacks noticed which would avoid spam. It could cause a jail-brake experience to many scammer for sure. Please let us know why are you doing this bud? At least that is what they said... |
|
|
|
|
926
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
|
on: February 25, 2020, 11:28:41 PM
|
Scambusters are the A.I.D.S. of the Bitcointalk world.
SUGGESTED INCLUSIONS:
hacker1001101001
But, the extent of such abuse is to were you are referring to the good deeds of there scam busting, but on other hands, they don't even think twice to tear apart the repo of another scam buster like me. One can surely see these goods deeds really doesn't outweigh the damage caused on another side. I am so confused, did you just suggest everyone to include "A.I.D.S. of the Bitcointalk world" to their trust lists 
Now this is very interesting, seems account poochpocket is tagged as an alt of hacker:  I would usually ask for proofs, but according to OP and some of his suggested trust inclusions and mutual agreement that it is ok to have such tag as long as "it depends" and/or " is lower than some number" or " it's ok", I guess it is " it's ok" then. |
|
|
|
|
927
|
Other / Meta / Re: Ban evasion (account fxsurfer)
|
on: February 25, 2020, 10:24:32 PM
|
Does this intentional trolling make sense for flag type-1? I can easily argue that people who fall for his "advice" are at financial risk because they may not buy any Bitcoin at all (most recommendations are shifting to buying at least some).
I am not going to comment anything related to tagging/flagging trolls, nop  he will just make new account and continue with the same narrative.
It won't be so damn hard to spot him!  |
|
|
|
|
928
|
Economy / Gambling / Re: FORTUNEJACK.COM |Deposit 777 play with 1777 mBTC |Live Casino, Slots, Betting
|
on: February 25, 2020, 09:36:31 PM
|
According to our Terms and Conditions, we reserve the right to terminate all the accounts onto the same IP. The rules apply to the accounts, coming from the same family, household, relative or a connected person that might be somehow linked with the acc.  According to your privacy policy, you are not allowed to share private information, just saying...
Can we discuss something here, related to ToS? Bob opens account from his home. Bob sells house to Alice Alice opens account on FJ. FJ bans both accounts. Scenario 2: Bob is at work, bored working night shift Bob opens account on FJ. His coworker (Alice) comes to job next week and finds out her FJ account is banned. FJ says to Alice "I am sorry, Bob wasn't allowed to create account, that's why you are both banned". Scenario 3: Bob and Alice are friends. Alice is new in crypto world and wants to gamble with bitcoin. Bob suggests Alice to open account on FJ FJ bans both accounts because Bob and Alice are friends. Scenario 4: Bob and Alice have mutual forum trust inclusions, made several forum deals and sent positive trust to each other. FJ bans both account because they are "otherwise connected person" No, it really doesn't make much sense. Highlighted part of ToS doesn't make any sense at all, according to what is stated in ToS, you can call everyone friends and confiscate all funds. For company to "reserve right to qualify accounts as multiaccounts", company has to perform KYC check prior to customer depositing funds. Other practices are very...questionable. |
|
|
|
|
931
|
Other / Meta / Re: Ban evasion (account fxsurfer)
|
on: February 25, 2020, 05:33:43 PM
|
he/she
No sve sam to već objasnio.
Objasnio sam to
People where banned before from this forum many times with much less proof
were  Look at this: https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71990453&postcount=5528https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71991213&postcount=5537https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71998095&postcount=5552https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=72076759&postcount=5749https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71897921&postcount=5367Sounds familiar? Da, da, da... Bitcoin je broj, a ne traktor, slovo, auto, trokut, kocka... nego broj. Svojstva su ono što određuje bit stvari, a ne način njihovog stvaranja ili prijenosa. A svojstva broja 1 su kraća i duža crtica te materijali poput tinte ili magnetnih čestica. Dakle idemo .... 1.... Eto, stvorio sam pravi pravcati broj 1 koji se po svojstvima nimalo ne razlikuje od onog u nekoj bazi podataka. Hoćeš li ga kupiti ili ne? https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71866957&postcount=5264This is so much like this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5227839.msg53894001#msg53894001, "bitcoin is number. "1" - there you go, I created number 1. Would you buy it?" VS "I created excel spreadsheet. Here you go, a number" and bold part is similar style: Inače, ne znam zašto se toliko uzbuđujete. Samo sam vam izrekao činjenicu da je Bitcoin bezvrijedan jer ga ne može pojesti, popiti, voziti, ugraditi u gotov proizvod ili poseksati, i zato što vam njegovi izdavatelji ništa ne isplaćuju kao kod svih ostalih financijskih instrumenata. Nisam vam ja kriv što ste dio moderne investicijske prevare.
"bitcoin is a number, not a letter, car, triangle, cube" and in second quoted post "bitcoin has no value because you can't drive it, eat it, have sex with it". @Daniel91 speaking of "gramophone records" and insults https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=72053993&postcount=5641https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71935903&postcount=5491https://www.forum.hr/showpost.php?p=71892163&postcount=5324 |
|
|
|
|
932
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
|
on: February 25, 2020, 03:21:51 PM
|
Any news on standard compliance within your trust list? Have you come up with serious guild-approved excuses yet?
If number of negative feedback is lower than number of negative feedback which suggested exclusion sent then welcome to guild else suggested exclusion. It's more like. If ( user follows Core tenets) { "Welcome to the Object Standards Guild"; } else if ( user regularly and repeatedly ignores the Core tenets) { Suggested exclusion; } Simple to understand, your code seems totally based on your own double standards perspective. So you basically repeated what I said. If you want to talk about not objective double standards of "objective" guild, start from here:  ---------------------------------------- " if user regularly and repeatedly ignores the Core tenets" So you claim this is it, but you agreed with tecshare's reasoning for exclusion of forum member tmfp? You morons are suggesting users to exclude someone who fights against crypto scams. This is more like: If "I" like you then welcome to objective standard guild else excuses and suggested exclusion.
Can you please post number of allowed trust abuses (according to guild rules)? Just to make sure people who are in this guild don't cross their allowed abuse(abuse, according to core tenets) limits. Just hit me with the number. |
|
|
|
|
933
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
|
on: February 24, 2020, 10:01:20 PM
|
Any news on standard compliance within your trust list? Have you come up with serious guild-approved excuses yet?
If number of negative feedback is lower than number of negative feedback which suggested exclusion sent then welcome to guild else suggested exclusion. |
|
|
|
|
935
|
Local / Hrvatski (Croatian) / Re: SCAM upozorenja Zbirni topic
|
on: February 24, 2020, 03:02:15 PM
|
Ajme to je valjda opet onaj dosadnjaković, zaboravio sam kako se zvao acc, sa svojim "bitcoin ne vrijedi ništa" spamanjem kako mu ne dosadi, možda je u nekoj bounty kampanji gdje se plaća pljuvanje po Bitcoinu Možda radi za faketoshija međutim tvrdi da su sve kriptovalute najobičnija prevara pa vjerovatno ne, no nikad ne znaš što faketoši misli  Otvorio sam temu u meti https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5228148.0 za svaki slučaj, osim što izbjegava ban, mislim da je ova količina fuda, spama, gluposti i trolanja više nego dovoljna za ban, ako imate što za dodati, be my guest...ipak, imajte na umu da se FUD ne moderira. |
|
|
|
|
937
|
Other / Meta / Re: VOD should be removed from default trust for systematic abuse of his position
|
on: February 23, 2020, 09:46:10 PM
|
More pointless antagonism from Vod. Obviously retribution for demonstrating he is in fact a liar here. Also kind of pointless as he has already negative rated me for this. Vod 2020-02-23 Reference ""...by posting my private messages multiple times without permission, I would say not trusting him with any personal information is perfectly reaonable." Techy also posts private messages without permission and agrees that not trusting him with any personal information is reasonable. See Reference." But you agree with Vod's neutral feedback, take a look: Since he has already repeatedly demonstrated in this thread he has no concern for my privacy by posting my private messages multiple times without permission, I would say not trusting him with any personal information is perfectly reasonable.
Your words... Of course that doesn't stop Vod from scraping the bottom of the barrel desperately seeking excuses to abuse the trust system
According to you and points from random users in that thread, this topic should be locked, there is no trust abuse. |
|
|
|
|
938
|
Other / Meta / Re: The Objective Standards Guild - Testimonium Libertatem Iustitia
|
on: February 23, 2020, 08:48:26 PM
|
Are you now calling publicly available information slander? As you can see from the definition, you cannot slander someone on a forum. Many people have used that word while claiming they are legal experts. I just chuckle. Libel is the written word.  That is correct. Hm, so tecshare saying that I used slandering tactics, he defamed me? |
|
|
|
|
939
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Destroying Bitcoin with a single question
|
on: February 23, 2020, 08:39:29 PM
|
This is most likely his old account: fxsurfer (also banned for spamming, trolling or whatever). Of course it is him, I would highly advise everyone to put OP on ignore, he is bloody troll who is calling bitcoin a scam on various crypto forums for last several years, just google this site https://btcprevara.wordpress.com/ and you will see fudster shitting against bitcoin everywhere. Whatever You say it doesn't really matter, he will just call it "ad hominem", "no valid argument", "trolling" and continue with his "bitcoin is number in spreadsheet", "banana is worth more than bitcoin" thingy. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
