Bitcoin Forum
May 03, 2024, 04:04:43 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 ... 684 »
1141  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 09:45:34 PM
Quote
I mean the subject of DT being able to add a red tag next to someone because you don't like them revealing stats on your account.
Quote
This relatively new user marlboroza is trying to silence me
Quote
He come to this thread apparently not because he is stalking me and using my posts as an excuse to spam his high paying sig
Quote
He was not happy about being Number 1 on that reduction list and he is not happy someone started examining scores with just the top 10 removed. He can not give neg trust on some other bullshit when that is clearly the reason.
Quote
These people are making a mockery of this board all spamming their high paid sigs and acting holier than thou
Quote
it is clearly about the merit he is upset about
Quote
This is trumped up nonsense to try and silence me
Quote
Yeah I'm sure that he is very happy to see he is number 1 for receiving the most merits from the smallest amount of people on this board.
Quote
He is pissed at me for being number 1 in the entire forum on that reduction list of the smallest circle
Quote
He is hating on me for stats
Quote
You are not meant to use DT trust for silencing people or revenge for simply pulling stats both subsets of which i did not even request.
Quote
You can not try to use it as a bully tactic to silence people who analyse stats and cause others to analyse futher.
Quote
It is obvious he is giving me neg because he is pissed about all the merits he loses on every analysis of removing smaller and smaller numbers until it appears a lot of people (not saying him because he appeared just as I mentioned running him on that analysis) lose 50% or more of their merits I mean some people lose 100's and 100's perhaps 500 from just their top 10 fans??

These are all false assumptions and lies. You are now making shit up.

Quote
Hiding up with no evidence and scared to come and be put under some sensible investigation and analysis for his actions.
Quote
This is diabolical and worse that 300lbs of DT abuse is hiding constructing some junk excuse.
Quote
Sorry but this is getting stranger and stranger by the moment.
There has to be some reasonable explanation why I am not here 24 hours a day.


Ask DT1 to exclude me from DT2. I will gladly "accept" removal. Also send PM to theymos to remove all merits I have received from top 200 merit receivers.
That is all I will say.


By the way, what else we could expect from a guy who joined the forum to shill for cheap faucets  Tongue
Refer to some of the very early posts:
http://archive.is/3x8aI
http://archive.is/BXXxB
You got me...

~
Ponzi promoter  Roll Eyes

Additionally, deep toxicity is growing and already beyond ridiculous levels.
auction scammer  Roll Eyes

~
escrow scammer  Roll Eyes


So lots of quite realistic assumptions about you based upon your frantic panic of being revealed as number 1 most concentrated circle jerk beneficiary? and constant bringing it up even now over and over.  I mean based on that observable behaviour and only human emotion at being revealed as the most concentrated merit circle beneficiary and logical and reasonable opinion it is me that has brought this to the attention of the board you want to take some reasonable revenge.

Right so I see based on the observable data and sensible corroborating observations mentioned above ie you keep bringing merit up and believing for some reason I want your merit removed and that I should contact theymos and have them removed. Then its not exactly a stretch to see that these are reasonable assumptions. I mean I can not get into your mind and read it but I mean it is called motive ...yes you had observably have real motive.

Now opportunity ...well you are DT and by the lemon threshold there is never not an opportunity. FUCK THE LEMONS sorry about that salty no disrespect.  You took some opportunity but I crushed your old suchmoon story.

Well can you point out any statements made that you believe can not be reasonably assumed on that basis.

I mean you do realise this is not two equal people debating here and one wins on the basis of overwhelming observable evidence in support.

You are now the apparently the judge ..... You are not my equal here you are in a position to punish. Therefore you must provide evidence to the contrary to prove I am making unreasonable statements I mean you should need to prove I am lying to give punishment.

So do you have some REAL reason to justify a red trust or is this list of quite reasonable and well just pick one that is not and bring it forth.

I mean thats like me saying I am jealous of merit holders with more. I say false Red trust.  I mean you can see this is pathetic and worthy of you getting kicked off DT right.

State your precise reason and make it clear. You do have a reason right?

So a lot of your reasons for red trust were reasons you picked off this thread? fox time machine?

So you changed your reason for red trust now???

Or hedging your bets?

Oh no i see the link it is actually your incorrect assumption of what I was referring too that cause you to give incorrect negative trust.

Remove now debunked and you have the you can clearly see I was refering to your actual quote not a boxed that obviously i made because you pressed quote.
1142  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 08:29:43 PM
wow meta is a freaky place....

It's a game for people with nothing better to do. Why people play it? Some play it because they genuinely think they're doing something good. Some play it, because they want attention (to their opinions). Some play it, because it's kind of a strategy game. (I.e. be friends with the correct people, do not piss on the wrong people, and you'll do fine.) All sorts of cliques. Players trying to reason and wiggle stories up and around to justify any kind of behavior, which in reality is often being out of all proportions. It can be compared to some other forums meta level struggles, but here in Bitcointalk people seem to think they're more advanced or more correct, while in reality it's more like an alternative reality, like you mentioned. Leading to a significantly worse outcome.

It's no surprise that a huge amount of old-time users have left and are never coming back. Additionally, deep toxicity is growing and already beyond ridiculous levels. I would argue that increased BTC/USD has a lot to do with all this...

Why do I care to post this? Because it would make me more happy if I got to see some people realize what a shit show this is.

Yeah good question.

I guess I found out about a guy a noob who was being bullied around a bit harshly by some of this same group. Although later some did kind of get more fair. Strangely marlboroza was one that turned out quite fair (ha destroying my own case now) anyway so then I found started examining what is this DT list and....well I never realised in all the years happy and content on alt discussion and the ANN section how this board was kind of controlled. I assumed theymos and some mods. Actually I still love this board and believe it is a great place even now due to how fair the moderation has been over the years. The mods made it great... you can say anything have any opinion (nearly) so long as you can provide valid argument for it and a good case. It has been great over the years and I usually lurked just reading and watching some real masters argue and debate all kinds of things not just tech stuff. I mean you are a very early adopter so perhaps it was even better then. But some really great posters have come and perhaps will return. I worry some have cashed out and will not return. But I hope they will.

Anyway yeah then I started realising sadly there is a group (perhaps well meaning really) but they are quite closed together and there a few that stick together and if you disagree with something or present something they don't like then they all swarm out on you with creepy persistence where ever you post one will be there then they all come along. If you disagree with one you disagree with all. I mean that is good they have reached some kind of collective consensus and they do work hard and do very good work for the board in some ways. However they are not right about everything so they can end up forcing their opinions on others because if you do not align no merits and then if you get really out of line with them and ask to many questions or question their criteria for taking this kind of self righteous high horse attitude and forget bothering with any kind of logical debate it just become a pack of wolves all sniping and shouting unsubstantiated nonsense and strange logic and unlikely verging on ludicrous theories or explanations of actions taken. Then if one gets a little annoyed you they may find some way to make it appear you just stepped out of line and into the threshold for neg trust. That threshold needs some criteria really. I mean I like salty he is cool  but I think the criteria should not allow lemon hate to clog the system you have to id real scammers.

If left unchecked and they get used to acting with impunity and nobody questions this then it will get worse.

I mean i notice these high merit members are mostly all DT listed too? and getting nominated for next mods.

It think it will be okay but there needs to be some limits they need to abide by and if they can not abide by these fair limits and rules they need to be removed. The community needs to speak up if they notice unfairness and not be scared because DT negs can be reversed or deleted if they are proven to be an error on their part.



1143  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 06:59:37 PM
The only thing that really is trust abuse is lying, with a few exceptions.
That is a ridiculous assertion. Both positive and negative ratings have a clear description and if the situation doesn’t match the description (reasonably), it is abuse.

Being a troll has nothing to do with the chances of someone not honoring their obligations in a trade, which is what the trust system is supposed to help people measure.

The same can be said in many other reasons for giving out ratings.

Thats not true. Behavior does have an influence on whether you'd trade with someone or not. I personally would not trade with someone who exhibits concerning behavior. The trust system is supposed to be about accurate feedback for members, the content is more or less decided by whats acceptable by the community, and to this point, giving someone a negative for trolling, being an account farmer, owning multiple accounts, being racist, etc isn't something thats unheard of. It would be abuse to claim that the guy is a serial scammer because of their behavior. It isn't abuse to point out that behavior however.

I personally wouldn't give out negatives for trolling, but I also wouldn't give out negatives for owning multiple accounts or account farming, and thats the generally accepted practice by the community. I however certainly would give out a negative if it was for harassment or something of that nature.

Again, I didn't read through Cryptohunter's posts to prove to myself whether there is anything worth being concerned about from their posts. My position is that if the behavior issue is subjectively accurate, then its worth noting. I'm not claiming the claim itself is accurate or not, I'm claiming that the basis of the claim, if accurate isn't abuse.

How is something subjectively accurate? I mean you seem an okay guy that is serious question not me taking the piss. How do you confirm it is accurate if it is subjective? I mean what criteria is there. I mean that leaves this open to anything really and reduces its value to zero if we all exercised it to the max without it being abuse.

For example take the lemons thing. What if i am really offended by people that do not talk about lemons in every post? so I just spam negs on everyone over and over as a DT member. Then someone is offended by not mentioning oranges. I mean it is true i think someone should love them and mention oranges in every post or negative DT. The system willl be ruined it is therefore abuse because it is not designed to be ruined  like this. Are you saying people need to scan thousands of lemons oranges pears until they find a real scam accusation?

This is absurd and again you seem nice but this meta board is like an alternative reality where things that would usually be considered ludicrous and mad are now the normal and sensible way of things in meta. But logical reasonable things outside of meta are nonsense, conspiracies, lies and stupidity. The people with all the anti logic and that see no need to abide by any generally accepted conversation or debating rules or usual structure are the

Between suchmoon, foxy and the time machine, loyce the AI in progress, the lemons and TP's even stranger variant of logic and laudas ever present darkness lurking over everything pulling string and you can't help speculating you mention his neg trust you get one right after ....is malborozo connected to this king pin?

wow meta is a freaky place....

Malboroza get my red trust off asap and I let it slide this time. You messed up you assumed incorrectly and insanely that i was trying to deny that I had just posted something you had already box quoted and had in front of my face in public on the same page. Over drawing a sensible conclusion that I am denying the other quote that I did not say that was similar to something I did say that fitted the description  of the quote I described to you.

Remove it or be removed or bring into question every DT that does not push you out. It is disgraceful.
1144  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 06:25:01 PM
You want to accuse someone of lying or false accusations

This one's gonna be tough. I might need to scroll as many as two lines...

It is obvious he is giving me neg because he is pissed about all the merits he loses

For this appeal to have any chance of success perhaps you should focus on facts at hand, starting with the reference link. Adding more lies and insinuations isn't helping your case.

I have produced corroborating events already look it up.... just before he gave the red trust...

You KNOW when you said this is nothing to do with merit nonsense...

His final words are all about reporting him and having his merits taken off and still angry about this merit nonsense you say is no part of it.

Or are you saying he usually does not wait to find out what people mean or are referring to and just gives negative trust on some assumption he made ? if that is how he usually operates?? then we may not need to look at the other obvious explanation that attaches itself to his last message.

Perhaps I just his latest victim.

Either way get it removed soon or he needs removal. Where is he hiding anyway? I will forget about it and not bring it up if he removes it asap and put it down to over excitement at being a top 10 number 1 hit.

I was not even focusing on him at all until he pulled this shit. I never even mentioned he was number1 on the entire board even though i noticed it and he kept bugging and sniping at me with comments.

If he does not look me up all the time in every thread I will not be looking for him and never have. He tries to pick holes in my posts and then falls flat like you suchmoon and ends up stating crazy nonsense like this story or some even worse out of anger.


1145  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 05:50:46 PM
Look it is simple red trust is for scammers or else nobody cares about these petty arguments. Its meant to stop ppl getting scammed right? but even if people do not realise petty nonsense in there damages the real scores and usefulness...

Malboroza and any DT trust needs to make optimal decisions or give fair opportunity for optimal decision to take place.

You want to accuse someone of lying or false accusations you need dialogue to see what exactly they mean and why they are saying it and hear their case.

You can't make unreasonable assumptions incorrect assumptions as to what they are referring to and then simply neg trust them on this incorrect premise.

This is nonsense. It is obvious he is giving me neg because he is pissed about all the merits he loses on every analysis of removing smaller and smaller numbers until it appears a lot of people (not saying him because he appeared just as I mentioned running him on that analysis) lose 50% or more of their merits I mean some people lose 100's and 100's perhaps 500 from just their top 10 fans??
I don't care you want to appreciate certain people and bookmark their post histories go ahead it is not against the rules ..... but don't get all angry when it is revealed and hold grudges and continue to beat on about it after the person revealing has said he is bored of it 2 threads ago and is happy to talk about something new.

what are the chances...

I mean what are the chances I mention because I do not think suchmoon will be that affected by a top 10 removal and marlboroza is already number 1. So I just say cant wait for suchmoon and malborza to get theirs done too. Since some people were removing the just the top 10 merit givers to each one and like lauda lost 50% of his entire earned merit by 10 users and others were enjoying other revelations of similar %

So i mention suchmoon and malboroza because they are the only 2 not yet analysed.

Next thing malboroza is there now because he had been hounding me or if he was just appearing to comment on my posts all the time by chance..... and I told him stop stalking me and spamming his sig on me all the time. He now says he was searching his name spelled incorrectly (by chance the same way i misspelled it just before) on some search engine he could not remember and found this thread. He was not stalking me apparently and had not just heard he was coming up for a large haircut by his top 10 getting removed.


Next thing he said something like (check I can't keep back and forth but very like)started off about talking about merits now talking about red trust for lauda and now the pharmacist getting ass banged by lauda


I think because he posted "one thing i said (red trust for lauda)" then " something similar but bit more serious than i said i said tp was asskissing him like sucking up to him not ass banging him"

he is saying I said both of those things. this is what seems reasonable one thing i did say and something similar. I presume he got confused and went a bit far.

I tell me he is misquoting me and to keep his disturbing fantasies to himself.

Next I get red trust for apparently lying and false accusation of him misquoting me.

I mean just giving red trust on a wrong assumption he made is abuse anyway. You need to make the optimal decision and give a fair opportunity to understand what someone means. So what your merits under some criteria appear less they are not taken away and you are legendary anyway stop being so angry about it.

Get my red trust off there malboroza or you need to be removed from this position though.


Just as bad those making up crazy stories like I would deny writing something I just wrote on the same page someone had already quoted in public infront me .... rather than be referring  to  another quote beside it that i DID NOT SAY?? and was actually fitting to the description I gave for indicating I was referring to exactly this other quote???....that person is playing games on serious matters.

He needs to stop this or else he also needs removal. The DT trust list and the trust system is FAR FAR more important than merit and not one to be made a mockery of.

People in power need to demonstrate in public they give fair reasonable opportunity to reach optimal decisions based on all available information. Not make an assumption of what someone is refering to and run with that to give red trust.



1146  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 05:30:34 PM
Are you being serious such moon did you believe this ??
Yes.

So because you do not clarify to which quote i am referring to even after my disturbing fantasies clear indication you decide to assume I am lying or making false accusation? based on your incorrect assumption ? and therefore I get RED TRUST??
That's why I suggested immediately after I realized the issue with double quotation marks that you retract your ambiguous statement.

The corroborating evidence below the final post just before red trust is clearly still anger over this merit business.

Either malboroza gives out red trust usually without clarifying or discussing what someone means??? or he just wanted excuse to give me red trust for this.
It's very difficult to clarify anything with you since you go on multi-page rants where one sentence would suffice. You mistakenly assumed the text between double quotation marks is attributed to you. Can we agree on that?

Why would i retract an ambiguous statement I would simply clarify my statement even more clearly than I though it needed for any sensible person to understand what it is I am refering to.

Anyway you want to give red trust for lies you must be clear what the person is referring too the onus is on you to get all details in line to make the optimal decision. That is why people are DT. The optimal decision was based on a ludicrous assumption.

I made clear effort to point you to the quote I was referring too I am not sure why you would assume at all it related to any other quoted statement. If you were not clear because any human would doubt someone would 1. deny what they just typed in public that is still there staring at them having just been quoted in public.  2. that the thing i describe as distrubing fantasy does not seem to fit with this these quotes.



1147  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 04:36:09 PM
marboroza is clearly misquoting me as saying " lauda ass banged the pharmacist"
I believe what you're on about is contained in the following:

...so thank you for inviting me to this valuable and sensible discussion which moved from "cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers" to "tag Lauda!" and "Lauda stuck it in TP's ass "

To believe that this is an intentionally-contrived misquote is wrong. This is a synopsis of the flow of conversation in the thread dialogue. I see no attack here.

So do you mean to say he is not quoting me there? or he is? who is he quoting and why is it right next to my first quote that is from me?
and why is it related to PT ass kissing lauda?

I need to walk through this entire thing step by step because i accept what you say if you know how to analyse this from some english language rules.

but let me accept that for a moment if we are going by the rules of English language only and not employing any other context or other plausible explanations that I think have considerable reason to lead me to believe he was refering to my first comment and my second comment.


2. so then I say it is a misquote and I do not  mange to convey to him enough clues to dictate clearly what I am refering too..... and even specify the quote I am refering to is : Describing disturbing fantasies of his own... this is clear indication of what I am refering to even if he was not quoting me as i believed he was I mean you can't get DT trust for not making it clear to him what I was taking about even after a good effort where any reasonable person would assume in light of the content of what i said it would apply to that quotation... i mean even then if they are unable to understand and make an incorrect assumption you can not get NEG DT for it can you?

I mean if I am getting a red trust for apparently lying or false accuasation ...then surely to say I am lying or accusing you must first understand and make clear to yourself what it is I am saying is the focus of my lie or accusation. I give clear indication of what that must be. How can anyone assume from my statement I could be refering to any other statement he made there in his paragraph I mean by common sense he only said a couple of things so for me to refer to the one i mean as... Describing disturbing fantasies of his own? logic dictates i am refering to the ass banging commment.

3. So we are in a position now that even if I accept (which honestly I believe he was but for this debate but accept i could be wrong) he is not clear about what I am refering to even though I make it very clear i believe by saying Describing disturbing fantasies of his own. So for him to charge me with lying or false accusation he needs to be very clear on what I mean and so since he is not clearly.. then he can not as yet say I am lying or making false accusation? he needs to make sure of what i am saying as much as i should have (and did make an effort to understand what he was refering too)

I am clearly not saying what he thinks i am saying ....he does not seek to make get clarity and rather decides to believe in the face of common sense and all logic that I am actually objecting to him pressing the quote button and presenting that which i just typed 5 seconds before which i can see infront of me right then that i just wrote? does he believe I am saying I never said that? I mean that seems completely crazy. I can see it there an so can everyone else and why on earth 1/ would i refute it it is there in black and white and 2/ it is not a Describing disturbing fantasies of his own? i mean that should be totally illogical to think i am refering to that quote. I am to blame for someone quite illogically for 2 clear reasons jumping to an incorrect assumption.

So of course to give red trust without even establishing my objection and going for the totally illogical option instead of clarifying with me is deserving of me getting red trust in his books?

People believe this is true.

I mean my plausible step by step (not that it actually matters at the crux as much as establishing what someone is referring to before accusing them of lying) is countered by suchmoon saying he believed all along I was saying  I did not write what everyone just saw me write and was there in black and white in the box in malborozas post? in front of me in black and white... this is the one he really believes??

Are you being serious such moon did you believe this ??

So because you do not clarify to which quote i am referring to even after my disturbing fantasies clear indication you decide to assume I am lying or making false accusation? based on your incorrect assumption ? and therefore I get RED TRUST??

Get real.

Even if (which seems crazy) I am making an incorrect assumption( lets say i did )

I immediately refute this incorrect statement and will get to the bottom of this nonsense and clear up exactly why he said this. This is the sensible route to establish ...why he is saying i said that, and also to get him to argue his point and change it if it is incorrect . I mean I know i did not say that but perhaps he is confused perhaps he thinks i said it but got it wrong, perhaps anything. So now starts the lets establish what you mean why you said it and get to the truth.

He does nothing wrong assumption red trust? on minor thing... why???

Simply because even though in the meta thread suchmoon claims it is not related to merits.

The corroborating evidence below the final post  on this thread by malboroza just before red trust is clearly still anger over this merit business.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5086297.msg48750243#msg48750243

I mean he appears from that mispelling in his secret search engine regarding his name just after I say I cant wait for malboroza and such moon to have their scores adjusted for the top 10

Either malboroza gives out red trust usually without clarifying or discussing what someone means first??? or he just wanted excuse to give me red trust for the merit thing he is annoyed over.

There is very strong evidence here it is the latter. Unless anyone can provide examples of red trust for something like this from him before.


I mean to such moon my conspiracy theory which has logical steps and if he can break those steps with hard evidence that is not the case or a probable explanation at any step I will be interested. I mean this link thing yes one small detail but totally out gunned by many other unreasonable illogical assumptions one must make to believe I was

1. denying something that everyone can see i just typed on that very same page that he just put in that exact post and he expects me to believe i was refuting i had just written that and staring me in the face?

2. saying that those quotes in box quotes were his "disturbing fantasies"

this is again like the time travel and other ludicrous and highly unlikely and improbable stuff he always comes out with.

I am certainly not accepting you could possibly believe this you knew full well I was referring as a disturbing fantasy ...to lauda ass banging the pharmacist. Not some boxed quotes that had nothing to do with that.















1148  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 03:58:56 PM
He has no business being in the DT network. Whoever has him on their trust list should be held accountable and promptly removed from their position if they will not adjust their trust list.

For some reason theymos seems to think it is a bad idea to hold DT1 users accountable and this is what we have come to.

Handing out negatives for being a “troll” is ridiculous and is absolutely inappropriate in any circumstance. I don’t think there should be second chances for someone who hands out negative ratings for this reason.

This is completely true.

But worse they need to define trolling and demonstrate it clearly meets some sensible criteria.

I ask that they produce trolling examples and if they do they better make sure I have not suffered similar banter at their hands or they can get neg trust. I mean actually the charge is not trolling here it is lying apparently . If you read the last thread malboroza clearly quotes me as saying about lauda and TP doing more than I suggested together and I object to this and it all kicks off. They come up with some mad story that is totally nonsense. I break it down stage by stage as it happens and it is apparent they jumped to the wrong conclusion if viewed sensibly but even if you want to see it their way they can not leave me DT trust for saying I did not say what he is quoting as the second part of his statment after he quoted me in the first part.... all they had to do is clarify a slighly ambiguous situation to them and actually establish what I meant. I made the statement that I did NOT say what he had quoted first. They need to clarify what I am saying not just jump to conclusions and then say I am lying>>> How can they know?? then give me NEG DT because they don't clarify and they can read my mind?? I mean if i am telling the lie they need to be sure of what I am even saying right??  I said he is false posting me but i did not try to neg him did I?  I made it clear too by saying about his disturbing fantasy and considering he only said 2 things one of which I already said clearly that points to the obvious disturbing fantasy he made up himself.

If all of those threads are viewed in chronological order you will see that far more often than not they are far more caustic and agressive with me than I am with them and far far far more times will they make statements of a ludicrous nature and refuse point blank to provide any shred of evidence or corroborating events. If that is trolling they are far far more often trolling me.

The latest cock and bull stories are laughable and a disgrace to think anyone could believe their nonsense.

The details are all there. I mean also the logic that some of these people employ is well quite a mess to the point where honestly and I am not being funny here I do feel guilty to point it out some bluntly because I would normally just ease them into seeing it more how reality dictates that it is.

1149  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 02:39:52 PM
I really don't think this is a very good way of removing your negative trust from marlboroza. I don't know marlboroza personally but I know him to be a fair person when it comes to changing the negative trust he is giving to other members. With what you did you just worsened your position towards him and maybe he will leave the neg feedback a little bit longer in your account. Remember just talking to him via private message and asking for forgiveness can work, posting this nonsense is the complete opposite of it.

please provide evidence he has been fair in my case then I can discuss this with you further.

asking for forgiveness ??

"this complete nonsense"?? do you mean observable events ?

Please substantiate just one thing you say please with some semblance of evidence or corroborating events.

If you can not I expect you to delete your comment or explain why you will not.

Please do not vanish and not reply like most others here when I ask for any evidence, any examples of what they even refer too, or when I get their replies that are not even clearly a response to what I asked for. They just jump from point to point.

They say I lie , the things i say are stupid and  jealous and every other thing they like first especially suchmoon but if i dare to even dream of making fun of them back when they say ludicrous things they get all upset. Well such moon and foxy take it back as good as they give to be honest in that respect the others break down ... if they snipe and attack me if I say anything unkind back to them in the form of reminding them of actual events and things they have really said in the past.

I mean i did realise posting in meta to those whom are obviously not going to like seeing 80% reductions in their own merits are cut away from each other I will not be popular but this is simply an observable instance.

I have said it does not matter and I am even giving them the top 200 merit and compounding the issue because simply the number of collisions with other people more often who do things to help or reply even here in meta. So it is not essentially bad it just makes it impossible to make merit some objective score right now.

However the real issue they will not accept is that it is not essentially correct to say that higher merit score poster is have more value to his posts that someone with less merit score.  So as I have said as an example it is quite possible that someone gaining 500 merits in meta 90% from the 0.13 is actually a  less valuable poster than someone with 30 earned merits from alt coin discussion board. This is the main reason.

Then I have to take anger from such moon when he says things like

"most pre merit legends are spammers"
and that basically words to the effect ...I am stupid and deliberately misleading to state that some of the 99.93% of the active users are capable of making posts as good or better than some of the 0.13%

Look all of this is difference of opinion, yeah some heat, some banter then someone really gets upset and pulls DT red trust for trumped up fake reason that I will not accept that I said something I did not .... then when I will not accept it they come up with an even stranger tale.

On top of 6 or 7 upset merit cyclers so upset that even when I say I want to finish talking about it all data has been presented and all statments have been made. They make 2 more threads with me in the OP and thread title - in one quoting my words that were based on different criteria and even then i defend all accusations and answer all questions they say I am still spamming and going on about merit after they made another thread. Then when I say okay lets drop it then .... another thread pops up by the same group me in the title and then of course I am still going on about it and spamming even trolling them....errr with facts okay.

Then lauda appears - with all  claims of my pseudo logic, my jealousy and says Im lying about lots of things. Then will provide not one example of this when I ask for it??

 Then after I start bring up the truth about his past because I know him from xcoin darkcoin days and actually relate real events about laudaM actual facts i know are real. PT turns up and startss sniping.. he has good technique for adding support to his friend in every post either merit for things they say or says something seemingly not to aggressive at first then just says he is way off the mark or tells lies .... but when pushed to substantiate he refuses or tries for 1 second with something usually easy to find gaping holes in and then just says you are on ignore or runs off. He also confesses he does not understand enough to know if lauda did do wrong concerning the 3000 bch or whatever but either way he is sad he is not DT or mod now? and he is just like that cos he is loyal? okay well then I best not criticise or look into lauda to find out the facts after he keeps popping up with so many kind remarks about me.??

I mean I never came to meta before I saw PT trying to get someone banned on false information. This is the other example of clear misjudgement and oversight by the DT and the DT negative remaining even after they have been proven to have left negative trust based on their own oversight and incorrect information.

Now TP and Malboroza all these people are dominant in meta. Honestly legends have told me they want to give me support but are scared of voicing their view even if based on observable event because they fear neg trust from these people.

This is sorry state to have reached. Trust score to some ppl is important I guess but to me not being a trader then I want him malboroza to remove his neg trust or detail and improve suchmoons story with is obviously not plausible and does not fit with the stream of events as can be clearly observed by anyone examining the details of that convesation closely.







1150  Other / Meta / Re: DT trust ABUSE by people here. Needs attention at once before goes out of hand on: December 19, 2018, 02:37:54 PM
It's a trite offence and hence I disagree with the rating. That being said, there are fallacies and inconsequential statements being spit left and right by cryptohunter many of which I haven't the time to look over.
I will read over more of his posts at a later date (soon) and reconsider the rating but for now I see marlboroza's as a spur of the moment—a rash move transpired from the events thereof.

Thanks please explore all of the threads in meta and that last one on reputation in chronological order in deep detail. If you get some spare time. I feel a deep review by any senior members will be essential and will help others make their minds up about this red trust for apparently objecting to being misquoted. But it has build up to that really so that is the last thread to read to put in proper context.

If you really do find any statements at all where I have not produced any evidence or any corroborating events that could not reasonably cause such a statement to be made bring them up here so we can get to the bottom  of them in public.

Also please so the same for all statements that are not backed up or explained by any of the others.

I am fully hoping many will scan in depth all of those threads because everything I mention on this post is how it went down.

@ lauda I would certainly like all of the 4 threads viewed in detail about the merits one I will list them here in order in one minute...



1st ...https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5081670.0  more coming
2nd  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5084723.0
3rd https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5086297.0 more coming..

I think there is one more somewhere where r1s2g3 provided the stats when I asked him for them initially. But there was no kind of arguments on that thread really.

I was sure there was 4 main threads but I can not see the 4th one about this merit top x removal.
1151  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 02:23:47 PM
What is going on? I thought this was supposed to be about the top 200 merit receivers, not a cesspool of character attacks.

well the salient and important part is

marboroza is clearly misquoting me as saying " lauda ass banged the pharmacist"

Then when I complain and said I merely provided evidence that he was ass kissing up to him and never said anything like his distrubing fantasies he gave me red trust for saying I am lying  and such moon tried to provide evidence of such. but just showed a statement from me talking about seeing their stats analysed in the same way the others had.

It is now observable I never even said what malboroza quoted  and they got the wrong end of the stick but they still want to red trust me and such moon says it is nothing to do with any merit nonsense of analysing stats but clearly by his post you can see at the end he is still upset at me when i never asked for the top 50 to be removed loyce did it on his own steam.

If you were hoping for anything new about top 200 merits there is Nothing new here apart from some new calculations that show some people lose over 50% hundred of merits if 10 persons only are prevented from giving theirs.

The rest is lauda telling me that I am a liar and lying compulsively and not providing evidence to substantiate his claims.
Me telling lauda he is a scam enabler and looks like a scammer
TP telling me he is not sure if lauder has done wrong but supports him anyway cos he is loyal.

thats about it really but I am trying to force a reason for my red trust that i can see is not a plan to crush me from talking

WOW thanks for that trust to help balance this I very much appreciate this.
1152  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 09:26:13 AM
Cryptohunter, how come you're asking several people to back up their claims with evidence, while you don't do that for the claims you make?


I'm tempted to list the Top200 Merit Receivers minus their Top10 Merit Fans. I'm curious to see what comes out, especially considering theymos' recommendation to use up all source Merits on good posts.

Not this confused sole. I thought I am on ignore... off ignore ....on again.

Don't be just tempted there are merits waiting for this new idea that you had after reading my threads again.

I mean don't say thanks for those last 20 you got from doing as I told you and that I had already presented many times (not my own work r1s2g3

Bring the claim that I have left unsubstantiated or without corroborating events OR ADMIT YOU ARE LYING THAT I DO SUCH THINGS THERE ARE ONLY 2 OPTIONS PICK 1

Don't be coy

Well we know some lose a huge amount so that's nothing new. I know lauda for one will drop down a several 100 merits LOL

Why the temptation now though? is it so malboroza will not be number 1 reduced of the entire board on the smallests analysed subset??

Sorry his claim to fame will remain we can have a new winner after he has deleted his negs on my account. Because he is going to never ever hear the end of it until he does. He is hiding now concocting some more unbelievable tales I expect. I kind wait to see him again for his complete explanation of how DT gives out neg trust . I will walk with him through his entire thought process to fully understand the DT neg trust he gave.... in public for full public analysis. Then we can see what type of person he really is. Remove this trust after you see you made the mistake not me and I will let it slide. This needs to happen in 24hours or else I will not stop insisting he is removed from DT trust on the basis of being dishonest and him and suchmoon making up some elaborate story to blame me.

If he has a good reason that stands up to sensible scrutiny. No more time travel no more bookmarked my friends ran out of merit so saved them up for one big spree. Not seeking you out but that strange mispelling I made on that search engine i forgot which one.  I like the banter, I like the jokes but when you are giving RED TRUST for no sensible or fair reason. There is need for sensible disclosure and full explanation in detail else this is an abuse and grossly unfair. No more saying unbelievable and crazy nonsense and expecting no comeback or questioning to find out a sensible truthful answer.

He made the mistake , such moon misunderstood the entire thing so called me out incorrectly  ...... they need to realise this and do the right thing. They never tried to correct me (because i was not wrong it was a quite reasonable conclusion i reached in this context) simply went straight to RED TRUST ..... No way that is sliding. If these events do not do the trick when presented now or tomorrow or another time or another time. His judgement will be questioned and measured against this abuse due to his own strange interpretations in this thread and trying to blame me for his strange thoughts. I will always bring it up with him and I mean always at every opinion he give I will correctly and honestly warn people that they must realised they are dealing with a dishonest abuser of the trust system. Those opinions need to be viewed with that in mind. It is fair disclosure. I will not be stalking him I will just search on some search engine for some words he may have used in a row... i forget which one now and boom there he is for me to start commenting on like he does with me.


1153  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 08:17:09 AM
Please stop pretending you are just accidentally browsing random search engines and not stalking down my every thread. I would never invite you to spam your sig whilst pretending to make worthwhile comment.

You really go searching for your own username in search engines with the exact same mispelling as mine.... sounds like a usual excuses I hear in meta.
This was clearly sarcasm.


Are you seriously telling me he was aiming quoting something you didnt go near mentioning? ... get real. Nobody could accept that explanation because you never said anything like that.
The use of the quotation marks was clearly "scare quotes", and not as a direct quote of something anybody said.


This is diabolical and worse that 300lbs of DT abuse
This was clearly a joke.


So people can get red trust for saying lemon without it being an abuse of the trust system?
This was clearly a metaphor.


I think part of the problem here is that cryptohunter, being (I presume) a non-native English speaker, is literally taking everything, well, literally. When you re-read everything with this mindset, it is easier to see how this misunderstanding arose and escalated. Perhaps with this in mind, we can all come to an agreeable solution. Having said that cryptohunter, you are not helping yourself by continuing to rage at people who are trying to help you (e.g. suchmoon and The Pharmacist).



I want him to run me through his entire though process during that exchange starting with me saying marlboroza is misquoting me.

1 - marlboroza made a post here containing two direct quotes from you, as well as a couple of "scare quotes".

2 - You then stated he was:
pretending to quote me when I never said that at all.

3 - Everyone assumed you were talking about the actual quotes, and so suchmoon made a video showing that you click on the quotes and it will bring you directly to the posts where you said the quoted text.

4 - A couple of posts later, you elaborated that it was the "scare quotes" you were objecting to, which no one ever claimed were said by you (or anybody else for that matter).

5 - The confusion was cleared up.

I want everyone to examine this carefully and closely .... this is now what i see happened here and it is clear.....


I appreciate your actually trying to help get a sensible conclusion.. also you can ask salty himself but i think he is serious when he says if people choose to give you neg trust for liking a lemon that is not abuse. This is not a metaphor he straight up means that. Ask him and see what he says about this lemon example he gave. He straight up means that is not abuse of DT trust or the trust system.

Anyway to explore this nonsense deeper step by step....

Walk through the observable events step by step starting with malboroza showing up...and what exactly he quotes of mine and what he replies to those quotes specifically and end with the video and the highlighted text.

Step 1

malboroza comes after reading the thread where i said

a. lauda should get more red tags
b. tp is asskissing up to lauda.
C. Can't wait for suchmoon and malborozo to have theirs done too....weeeee down the snakes and ladders..


malboroza now sees all of this together... and says this

Quote from: cryptohunter on 17-12-2018, 22:51:37

I accidentally mistype my forum nick on one strange unknown search engine which I can't remember which one it was and I was pointed to this post:
Quote from: cryptohunter on 18-12-2018, 17:14:42
Can't wait for suchmoon and malborozo to have theirs done too....
...so thank you for inviting me to this valuable and sensible discussion which moved from "cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers" to "tag Lauda!" and "Lauda stuck it in TP's ass "


--------------------------------------------------

So that is all he said.... now think about that he is replying specifically to where i say i can't wait for suchmoon and malboroza have theirs done too weee snakes and ladders ....  so why is he responding to exactly that comment with ass sex comments??? I mean why to that specific sentence. He is assuming I am saying i can;t wait for them to be done with ass sex too with laudas snake or whatever he is obviously like fox pup always going on about homo erotica they like to talk about I mean I am not against what they want to talk about or do but don't quote me as saying this stuff i never said. I mean there is no other explanation for this at all to reply to that exact sentence of mine with that reply he made. that actually was in reference to them getting their merits put through the minus top 10 filter like the others had just gone through. So that comment was nothing to do ass or lauda snakes in anyway as i clearly intended it.

He has made some false connection about it all based on Tp ass"something" lauda and can't wait for suchmoon and malboroza to get theirs done too snakes and .....  There is no other viable reason why he would reply to that specific sentence out of hundred i made with that specific remark about The Pharmacist getting it from lauda in his ass. Marborozas WORDS not mine. I never even mentioned anything sexually explicit at all.


NEXT...

Now so when I reply....

with this

@suchmoon
nothing of substance

@malborozo

Describing disturbing fantasies of his own and pretending to quote me when I never said that at all.

I mean there is nothing else that malboroza said that I can be referring to as disturbing fantasies in his post.


NEXT

such moon quotes exactly this

Quote from: cryptohunter on Today at 00:32:39
Describing disturbing fantasies of his own and pretending to quote me when I never said that at all.

You do realize that one can click on the quote and go to the post where you actually said that?

He is making the same assumption. He knows I can only be refering to malborozas ass sex reference there is nothing else disturbing fantasies could relate to in his post. What else in that post is a disturbing fantasy?? nothing there at all that is obviously what I meant and he knows this. Else tell me what else is a disturbing fantasy in that post?? does he have a disturbing fantasy at red tagging lauda? no besides I already clearly did say that so not that. There is nothing else that could qualify for a disturbing fantasy in that post malboroza made at all.

NEXT

I tell such moon to bring evidence I had orginally said that ... obviously about lauda banging Tp in the ass since that is all I could mean by a disturbing fantasy



NEXT

The video such moon creates?

Now this is so weird.

He is meant to be substantiating this dont forget since he precisely quotes it

that i had been Describing disturbing fantasies of his own and pretending to quote me when I never said that at all ,,,,this is what he quotes specifically. so he knows I am refuting i said about tp and lauda ass sex


You do realize that one can click on the quote and go to the post where you actually said that (he thinks he will prove by showing i said i want it to happen to suchmoon and malboroza and thinking about TP and ass "something was it kissing or ass banging" he is confused? says such moon.... then brings his proof. Well he thinks it is proof but proof of what in this specific context??

the thing he highlights in the video is  again I cant wait for suchmoon and malboroza to get theirs done ....weeeee snakes and ladders

why is he quoting that line to prove I did say what malboroza misquoted about tp and that disturbing fantasy of tp/laudas ass banging

Follow it is quite clear if if you read their precise quotes and precise replies "they got the wrong end of the stick so to speak " lol

They remembered me saying tp ass "something" lauda... they see me saying cant wait to such moon and malboroza get theirs done too weeee snakes and ladders ...and make a false connection simple as that. Then try to turn this on me when I said i never even said this and I was being misquoted. I would not go so explicit as full assfucking The pharmacist at all from lauda. I feel jokes are okay but kids can read this board so not too explicit but i mean they said it all now so kids dont read this thread... He specifically mentions lauda fucking the pharmacist in his ass and quotes it right next to my other quote. Now they try to say they were not quoting me but perhaps suchmoon or nobody.

Can;t wait for such moon and malboroza to get theirs done too.....weeeee snakes and ladders as proof i did say something like that.

Anyone deeply analysing it can see no other reason for suchmoons video highlighting of that line? what else does it show relating to malborozas disturbing fantasies with lauda and the pharmacist.




Suchmoon come here and explain this at once. I want to hear your entire thought process and every reply to every single thing you quoted and specifically replied to those quotes.. and you malboroza.

This invented bullshit story they thought I mean something else bring it and explain the video and the replies to specific quotes you posted. What else is there that I could have realistically meant? the entire thing is more time travel and i googled my name spelled wrong on a search engine i cant remember. This kind of nonsense is good for banter but this is not for red trust when you are DT.

Any person working through this slowly and picking what they are quoting of mine precisely and what they are replying to those quotes is quite straight forward.

I mean of course this is all nonsense from them. But even imagine (it is not real) that I did by mistake say to malboroza I did not say something i really did. He should just quote this and prove me wrong not give me red trust. I mean that is if there was a mistake and it was my fault for making it by some error then you do not get red trust for saying you did not say something you did by a mistake???


I want my trust restored to normal Or an alternative and sensible explanation with details on every single aspect.




@Lauda present evidence for these lies or stfu i see neg trust mania on yours from old members who can see through your devious  ways.

Bring these lies to light right now. Bring these attacks that are un called for on people that were just minding their own business and I dont mean people attacking me first.

another one with nothing to bring forth. Now bring the lies, and bring the attacks that were not deserving having attacked me first.



Hurry up.

I am having some very interesting conversations with ppl who gave you negative trust already. Don't keep bugging me with your unsubstantiated nonsense because I will divert a lot of time to a new thread on you. Perhaps you have been tarnished beyond what you deserve but I will help you get redemption if you deserve it .... then again if it is worse than we though....oh dear. I suspect the latter but I am not essentially interested in you right now since you have already fallen from grace. So don't make me become more interested.

That is not a threat at all that is simply an offer of publicaly reaching a fair assessment of yourself If you have no big skeletons then nothing to worry about. Maybe you will benefit. perhaps  not.

Or vanish and I may just forget about wasting my time on you for now.

Am I attacking you or are you coming to comment on my threads and attacking me with unsubstantiated claims when I could not give a shit where you are or what you doing. So please vanish back to the swamp.



@ eddie13 - thanks Smiley

the entire thing is insane and needs to reach all parts of this board to let people know what is happening with this DT trust nonsense being given out on a whim for provable errors on the DT part..  This is 2 times now I have seen it recently .... provably given on the basis of mistake of the DT.

If this thread is deleted more proof of them hiding the fact they are setting me up with

1. an unbelievable story
2. even if anyone could believe their crazy story from start to finish. You do not get red trust for saying you are misquoting me on the thread they are meant to be doing it. They simply prove they are not.
3. They have motive because I mentioned that trust is subjective and is cycled amongst a few at the top it just so happens Malboroza was shown by locye to be the most narrowly cycled of all. Not my fault this is data and I never even requested top 50. Also i never pointed it out before now although I was at times itching to point it out when he kept sniping at me in my threads and then not substantiating of qualifying his snipes. I still did not mention he was number 1 of all the intensely cycled merits so far.

Now remove my red trust or modify suchmoons events because they are not beleivable and he made a mistake and so did you.
Stop hiding behind you DT trust and present yourself with your side.

Also very worth noting

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5086816.msg48751290#msg48751290

suchmoon claims malboroza is not red trusting for any merit nonsense.

look at the bottom of the post before I get red trust.... he is still clearly very annoyed about this entire trust thing with him getting number 1 score on the top 50 removal

he tells me to tell theymos he must remove his 50 point score. I actually would have never spoken to malboroza if he had not come for me about merit on the threads.... .also even though previously i noted to myself he was the one who was reduced the most from the top 50 removal I did not mention it to him at all even after he kept sniping me in every thread and tracking me down. Even here tracking me and saying it was some search engine incorrect name crap. Even then. Now after getting red trust I finally have to demonstrate why the trust thing is annoying him so much. Although on several occasions i have praised him for things he never tries ever to say one nice thing back.
Merit to some people is a very touchy subject it seems. Don;t dare pull stats they don;t like pulling over and over themselves because it it does not prove how popular or recognised or how good of a poster they are they don;t like those things being questioned and even logically denied.

Sorry but it is true. Just don't worry about it. If you want to believe 2500 merits make you the best poster you can. The fact it is probably not true (i mean it could be) should not stand in your way if you dont want it to.

1154  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 07:19:31 AM
I want you to prove I am wrong about all the merit stuff and produce your evidence ... not some junk about yourself that you can excuse and backpeddle on.
See, this is where the "it will never end" part comes into play.  Now you want me to refute whatever it is you wrote about the merit system (which I haven't been following, since I don't really care if most of my merits come from just a few members).  That's another debate I just don't have any interest in.  I only care who I give merits to, and I'm trying to disperse them as far and wide as I can.  

And yeah, I do think it's a pity that Lauda was removed from DT.  But you claimed I supported Lauda in the scam accusation thread specifically and that is not true.  You're constantly shifting goal posts and are now saying I'm a liar about denying that I support Lauda in general.  This is the lunacy I'm referring to.

No point in continuing this for me, so I am d-o-n-e.

1. are you denying that you said that concerning the lauda bch debacle or ? are you trying to say you said it but not on the accusation thread (which is a pathetic cop out) yes or no?

2. are you denying you have posted in the merit threads opposing my views and making unsubstantiated statments and have been following those threads and meriting things there specifically comments that are trying to refute what I am saying? yes or no

3. are you claiming you want lauda back as dt even though you are unsure of his wrong doing because you dont understand it all yes or no?

There is every point in continuing. I sense fear of scrutiny of your actions which is usually because of wrong doing or being unsure about what you have previously posted.

Bring such moon back here because also he is not answering any questions and has ran off. I am still totally curious of why that specific line was highlighted in his strange video. Usually I can not shake him off.

I want him to run me through his entire though process during that exchange starting with me saying marlboroza is misquoting me. Since that video is strange and there is no reason to highlight that line at all. It has nothing to do with it any kind of misquoting at all.

You should obviously keep your nose out of things you do not understand or refrain from making comments that you can not substantiate when asked. Then there would be no reason for you to experience this scrutiny.

1155  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 06:32:47 AM
LOL you refuse to back up your false claims???
Actually, I did a few posts back when I tried to nicely explain to you that I'm not some die-hard Dash supporter, nor did I support Lauda in that scam accusation against him/her.  I explained that I questioned the forked coins issue and also admitted that I don't fully understand what the whole transaction was about, who was involved, and what all the details are.  That was a very contentious thread with lots of people on both sides, and I decided to just stay out of it.  

Those are just two examples of untruths you've told, and I do believe other members have been pointing out other ones as this and the other threads you're involved with progress.  You're not going to agree with any of our reasoning, so it's futile.  

In addition, I've written maybe a handful of posts saying I liked Dash--but I've also said the same thing about doge, and for the same reasons, i.e., low fees and quick confirmations.  I never tried to pump either coin up for financial gain and have never had more than a few hundred bucks' worth of either in my lifetime.  You also criticized Lauda for ceasing to support Dash?  You implied that Lauda did this as a pump & dump scheme.  I don't recall this, and it's not something you've provided proof for either.

LOL so only you can make assumptions based on nothing where as I draw reasonable conclusions based on things you have said these are lies. Please get some assistance.

You had my great cake example of dash scam then said thanks for showing me I understand then went on to keep praising it several times
You said words to the effect on the lauda debacle anyone can search ...exactly what I said on the previous page. You were implying if there are no specific rules for not keeping the bch then there is nothing wrong. Why delve in and mention that if you are not supporting him just stay out of it. Unless you feel that investors who lost out on a project that failed should not get the compensation they can from someone gaining off holding their bitcoins and has already been paid enough. That is not support?  I said explain deeper or launch your own investigation if you are unsure or dont understand it.

Then you even say you just like being loyal to him (so not supporting him right) because bla bla bla reasons.
I've seen you crying on about him being removed from mod. So don;t deny you're a total asskisser to lauda simple as that. Even though you say you dont understand it all so cant know for sure if all the smoke about him with the bch is true. So how can you be loyal to someone you are not sure if was in the wrong in a potentially huge scam. So stop back peddling and producing more lies.

Lauda was an ardent dash supporter and I had many arguments where he swore and cursed and was fighting me before you hatched here and others over and over saying it was no way a scam for all the same excuses i hear here about merits being fairly shared out. Then later said okay yeah it was a scam actually.

Anyway I don't  care about lauda now he is just loving poking his nose in to stuff and knows he is in a glass house. If he stays out of my way with his nonsense I dont care to think about him at all.

So yeah bring on more lies and incorrect theories you know like accusations from other threads prior to this on meta you made. I want you to prove I am wrong about all the merit stuff and produce your evidence ... not some junk about yourself that you can excuse and backpeddle on.







1156  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 05:54:32 AM
you are pushing for this red trust to stick.

Actually it's quite the opposite - I was trying to figure out if the misunderstanding about the quotes can be reconciled. However your incessant lying is getting in the way. It's between you and marlboroza. Good luck.

Bring the lying proof. NOW. Where are these lies?Huh

I can't believe honestly the corruption and collusion between people this forum is beinbg entrusted too. It is a sickening state and I am just starting to realise the extent of what they think they can get away with here and the crazy shit they can try and force people to believe.

I would invite a very close and detailed (do not rush) of all threads on meta involving me and this bunch and this thread here and the one I quoted with TP trying to even ban someone under false assumptions and lies.

Let's scrap anyone on DT who acts like this and ban them. These are hunting down 5 year old copy and paste and banning people and then abusing this board and anyone that questions anything they do with false charges and fantastical stories that we are expected to believe??

Also it has not gone unnoticed by me that these people call everyone else financially motivated and look down on them for this and then all refuse to remove their sigs if i do it aswell... for a year or even more to prove we are not here for the money and that we are enthusiasts.

How have these people infested this level of power here? kick them out and leave only the honest objective people that can justify and substantiate what they claim.



1157  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 05:44:36 AM
Prove any of your points that anything I have said is raving lunacy.
There is no point in arguing with you or trying to prove anything you've said is false, because that's a conversation that will last forever.  You will rebut every point with something else that has to be debunked, ad infinitum.

I will tell you exactly why I came here because you pulled a DT abuse on someone and I will bring it here now for everyone else to examine in light of the fact you based in on your false assumption and even needed others of DT who are not abusers to rectify the damage you tried to pull on this person.
Rambotnic, right?  Go right ahead and bring it here now, just don't expect me to argue any further about it.  Sometimes DT members disagree with each other and leave counter feedback.  That's something I might have done with marlboroza's trust he left for you, but there's no way in satan's kingdom I'm leaving you a positive trust.

LOL you refuse to back up your false claims???

I think you deserve red trust then. It stands to reason it.... you are saying false nonsense or you could prove what you are saying is true.

Produce or retract or come under the same scrutiny I am going to bring every single abuser under even if I get 100 false red trust for examining observable events in public.

Bring proof now or retract your lies.

I do not want it balanced I want it removed for being put their under false terms in the first place.

If you stay out of my way then you would not need to go through this public and totally observable process of getting called on lies you make up about me. Proof or retract.
1158  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 05:32:30 AM
I'd just like to let it be known that at no time has anything been inserted into any of my orifices by any member of bitcointalk.  Specifically, I have never been penetrated by Lauda as I believe I read somewhere in this thread.  Never even had any decent offers, and I'm a pretty high-class hoe in great demand, too.

I didn't figure cryptohunter would get negged for all of his blabbering as of late, but I probably should have expected it.  Same thing happened to mixan a while back when he went off the deep end and started taking the forum hostage with his raving lunacy.  There comes a point where if you spout enough nonsense and attack too many people, it's not going to be taken kindly to anymore.  I'm a bit puzzled as to why cryptohunter suddenly appeared on the Meta/Reputation scene and started making such a fuss about all of these things.  His account is much older than mine, and even I've been here long enough to know how abrasive the culture is around here--and even aside from that, he ought to know this isn't a battle he's likely to win.  I haven't even read many posts indicating that there are any members in his corner on all of this stuff about merits and trust abuse and so forth.  

I think marlboroza's feedback is somewhat harsh given his DT status, but I know where he's coming from.  Lauda has a genuine beef with cryptohunter, so I can understand that.  Either way, cryptohunter thinks everything he's writing is completely logical but that isn't true.  It's not a big stretch for someone to say that it would be hard to trust someone who consistently demonstrates that he can't think straight.  

In any case, red trust is not a means to silence anyone--giving someone a ban is.  And since cryptohunter states that he doesn't trade here, what's the problem?

Prove any of your points... that anything I have said you can prove is incorrect. Go for it now.

I will tell you exactly why I came here because you pulled a DT abuse on someone and I will bring it here now for everyone else to examine in light of the fact you based in on your false assumption and even needed others of DT who are not abusers to rectify the damage you tried to pull on this person.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5063753.msg47613204#msg47613204
Examine this entire thread it is another case of provably incorrect assumption from DT and not backing down under scrutiny again.

However luckily there are some DT people who are open to being objective.

I though I would see what all this DT was about and what is going on with this board and a bunch of hitlers talking down to everyone and acting all superior whilst having very dubious moral compasses. I will not be getting DT neg trust for anything I have said that you can not demonstrate is wrong or untrue.



Prove anything I have written is not true NOW. Bring your evidence or you are too compounding the abuse with lies. Substantiate you claims or be next in line for trust abuse.

I am waiting. If you do not produce evidence of these allegations of

" Either way, cryptohunter thinks everything he's writing is completely logical but that isn't true.  It's not a big stretch for someone to say that it would be hard to trust someone who consistently demonstrates that he can't think straight.  "

Not that is even apparently the reason so this is again false apparently I am red for saying he misquoted me as he clearly did.

So stop conflating issues and interfering with what you can not understand.

If you can understand then produce now. With evidence. Or retract.
1159  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 05:19:12 AM
You are double posting

I feel like we'll soon need a bingo for stuff cryptohunter projects onto others.


1. can you be banned for repeated posting of your own posts in different threads?

Depends on the content of those posts. But you can surely get banned if you make consecutive posts in the same thread, like you just did. And you know that because recently you complained about someone else doing it and that person got a temp ban so it's quite puzzling why you're deliberately breaking the rules now.

Actually now i review your video why are you highlighting that part where it says

looking foward to such and marlboroz having theirs done?

What specifically is the reason to highlight that line in particular?

Explain the video step by step... what are you trying to demonstrate?

I'm showing that the actual quotes (ones within quote tags) lead to actual things you said.

That was before I realized you misinterpreted the double quotation marks, not the quote tags, since you never said which part you considered misquoted.

I did not misinterpret as is obvious ... he quoted my first remark then quoted something like my second remark which was no way attributed to anything anyone else said on the thread since nobody did say anything like that.

Are you saying he said the thread descended into something i said and then something nobody said at all??? and put it in quotes along with my statement for some reason?  and then gives me red trust for natural sensible assumption he is misquoting me.

Then instead of explaining he is actually quoting nobody for some reason he give me red trust for it.

LOL this is foolish and a clear abuse of trust here. I find it impossible anyone can see it any other way.

That along with the statement about .....I was browsing some search engine I cant remember which one and I mispelled my name just exactly as cryptohunter had just previously???

This is a clearly trumped up fantastical nonsense .... he did not want his top 10 meriters removed simple as that and was sore for having the most merits from the smallest group. LOL that's not my problem I never called for removal of top 50 that was loyce. Sorry malboroza

Honestly I am not kidding I will seriously have you investigated for this fantastical story of nonsense to protect and enable such trust abuse if you continue creating these nonsense stories. You seriously stating this as reality or credible explanation demonstrates you need to be looked at in depth for being part of this.

I am being deadly serious when I say  this is flagrant and observable abuse by him and also you are enabling and claiming he is correct in his actions in the face of all evidence that is there for all to see.

Nobody should be in any doubt after looking at the thread that this is disgraceful  that you are pushing for this red trust to stick.
1160  Economy / Reputation / Re: cryptohunter's problem with the top 200 merit receivers on: December 19, 2018, 04:58:26 AM
You are double posting

I feel like we'll soon need a bingo for stuff cryptohunter projects onto others.


1. can you be banned for repeated posting of your own posts in different threads?
not that I am going to report it because i;m not into all that for a one off things that seem to be reasonble if he did not see the first time around

2. it is not 100% the same but it is quoting the same things he quoted before I already addressed. ?

or exactly the same questions and exact things I just answered him on.

"Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on 17-12-2018, 23:15:05
Quote from: cryptohunter on 17-12-2018, 22:51:37
I will merit whom I please

Exactly! People are free to merit whomever the please. If this rule applies to you, why does it not apply to the top 200 merit receivers/senders/sources or the Meta board, against which you seem to have some sort of personal vendetta?"

How is it you  happen to be here again so soon?

Actually now i review your video why are you highlighting that part where it says

looking foward to such and marlboroz having theirs done?

What specifically is the reason to highlight that line in particular?

Explain the video step by step... what are you trying to demonstrate? because now I watch it again it seems strange to highlight that line at all.
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 ... 684 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!