No look here i do it again.

You are a pussy and dare not even review proven facts of wrong doing by those you include in the trust system.

See here again this is true so it connects.

You are untrustworthy ... see there it is again. You can not even deny it because it is true.

I can call you a pussy and back it up with evidence. I can call you untrustworthy and clearly demonstrate it is true.

You are just making false assumptions and have zero evidence to back anything up.

Now why not get back to your big mac and ass kissing up to proven untrustworthy scum bags.

The better way is 100-150 earned merits plus 1500 + activity. Hence getting the best of both worlds and also you give a guarantee of a longer history here to review before making a decision.

Also you do not allow it to be GAMED as easily by those that are able to reward their own political groups with merit and ensure they control the entire DT system because even self awarding merits to their own group will not allow them to push possible ALTS and new friends into DT. They will be able to bestow merits on them but they will still have to wait for the objective and fair metric of activity to be met so that will slow them down greatly and filling it full of newly joined buddies.

Putting in activity and lowering merits to earned 100 or even 150 would be far more sensible.

Guarantees more history to review, longer time without scamming, not as easy to collude and control. More to lose since gaining that activity again which can not be gamed even if you have a bunch of pals as merit sources is going to be impossible to speed up.

Really though both systems of control should be entirely separated but on a anonymous forum that is probably impossible to ensure.

This again is not a sensible argument.

Do you claim getting red trust is an encouraging thing ? or perhaps useful to a new person using this board wishing to earn money or trade here?

I keep telling you over and over that anecdotal accounts mean nothing. I am lucky to be a legend and already wealthy so need no sig.

This does not apply to a huge proportion of the board so the threat of having their income cut off if they say something out of line or that gets them red is certain a big consideration to them which influences their free speech without doubt.

Also you argument is broken because of course once you have red tags there is nothing to lose by speaking out... it is prior the tags that the red stifles free speech. There can be no denial of this.

@xtraelv

I stick to what I posted regardless of your "explanations" for your actions and the actions of others. I notice you cherry picked out the 1st of the pharmacists false accusations and political ranting - which is quite untrustworthy behaviour.

There are others in the OP that are far far worse still.


@cabalism13 please shut up noob trash. I am not interested in you using my sensible thread to spam you  noob signature all over it whilst spouting out pure garbage. Ass kissing noob trash sucking up to untrustworthy scum for merit is more sickening that the actual scumbags themselves posting about busting scammers whilst supporting scams for their own financial gain.

@Jetcash

I am proud to be part of your ~ club

I mean when someone is such an observable pathetic chicken shit as you and therefore untrustworthy if you did not ~ me then I would be in the dirty company of those you include. I have no interest in DT anyway so it is of no consequence to me. I am hoping the entire dirty system of control is abolished.

However, the fact in black and white you refuse to consider or even look at the clear evidence that demonstrate you include such proven scumbags just makes you a pathetic loser and now untrustworthy too. A FACT that I shall not let you forget and shall enjoy bitch slapping your around with it whenever I feel like having some fun.

Because someone is tagging those they consider "scammers" does not mean they should be allowed to use the trust system for personal selfish reasons or to stifle free speech. I consider those sorts of persons very dangerous to this movement. If they must remain then they need to be tagging scammers only not tagging anyone they choose for any reason they choose. This is the main issue here.


Also I would expect it impossible to have a fight with Lauda alone. These persons do not operate alone they operate within a gang. You speak against one they all rush in to attack you by whatever means they can get away with.

Huge black Woman? LaudaM

1. You do not know how many BTC that I have. I am more of a bitcoiner than you most likely

2. False accusation please provide evidence of sale.

I will not seem to be the one begging for your attention. This is not the case. I am helping you. So the fact you are imposing these strange rules is not an issue for me. If you walk away from the debate and appear to not accept the facts I am presenting you in black and white. It simply reflects poorly on you rather than on myself.

the instamine was proven long before lauda made that particular statement . Of course it was proven when the miners at launch realised there was no way to mine it. Only the devs could mine because as you can see

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg4593601#msg4593601
Edufield said the github version was not updated, nobody could compile and only Edufield was able to mine until that time. It is 5.09 am and Edufield instamined alone 1153 block at 500 DRK + 60 block at reward 277 = 593120 DRK for him alone in about 1 hour.

Now Lauda who claims he knows there was NO premine because he was THERE on the launch.

Perhaps lauda was not lying but was simply high on pills at the time and did not know what it was typing it was a typo and meant to say there was a premine. Perhaps Laudas account was hacked but they only came on and posted lies when lauda was a sleep and did not notice this had taken place?

Now I notice you say that the Truth does not interested you? this is not surprising to me since this seems a common ailment in meta.

Now even false red trust is a good thing because it creates additional warnings that although invalid or even untrue are positive because it creates a sense of more awareness of possible wrong doing on the whole? Are you saying you request red trust on your own account for the greater good of the trust system?

I see now you that are trolling me.

Let me see you define bitch, bile, and bickering, and provide examples of myself matching these else I say that is a false accusation. I mean you claim that there are many many examples so you will therefore not have issue finding 5.

That could  be true but it does not mean over all it is net positive. You have to take into account the innocent accounts destroyed in this and the fall out from that ie the forum is getting a hostile environment and it will only get worse while persons are using red tags for anything other than scams or direct scammers. The possible implications for free speech.



That is speculation and possibly not true at all



getting rid of DT is not the same as scrapping the trust system.

although a broken trust system that can be used to suffocate free speech is worse than no trust system altogether.



Was not expecting this........... Fully agree with this 100%



Yes I agree with this part too.


Either tighten DT up so that abuse is prevented or punished and then reversed. Or scrap DT and push people to make their own custom lists. Or just call the entire thing feedback and people have to read it all and investigate the persons full history here.

I would rather see a few risk takers who do not do their homework possibly get scammed than see the freedom of speech here crushed and the entire place become a hostile environment.

DDE should eventually fix all of this to a degree.

Huge Black Woman please explain your post and state what outcome your sock puppet racist trolling sig spamming little mind sees here?

So far I just see qwk being given evidence of a direct lie and himself denying the evidence in public.

Perhaps you can shine some light on the rational qwk employed to not see a blatant lie when I just presented the clear evidence of just that in front of him.

qwk please be serious.

The fact is there in clear black and white.

1. darkcoin (xcoin) was proven a captive instamine. You have seen it in black and white and years later even the dev admitted it and offered an airdrop that could have been worth 2 Billion dollars.
Gostrol was only 1 person to analyse the launch. I was actually on the launch as you can see from the first page of the thread so I know it to be true first hand.  The instamine took place it is an accepted FACT.

2. Lauda can be seen denying the instamine and claiming he knows it never happened since he was on the launch. This is a LIE it is impossible for it to be the truth. Please tell me how this can be the truth. He was a known darkcoin protector (ie trying to justify or deny the instamine and praise it in other areas)


Please don't be silly now and deny that this is an observable LIE. The fact lauda lied is there in black and white or explain how it is not a lie.


This is not just a single instance of this claim and his protecting and pushing this scam darkcoin over the years.

Now please revisit the evidence and then come back with a more sensible reply.

Nobody who is familiar with this denies darkcoin even their strongest advocates or even the dev himself who offered the airdrop as compensation after we applied pressure to do so.

Also you are missing the point in my OP in another area when you are ignoring the reasonable assumptions/conclusions based upon observable events and not just facts because that was related to obtaining merit. Do you see that I claim that post must have merit?  

Now I am trying to be nice to you but I suspect you are not being genuine in your responses to me. This serves only to demonstrate to the objective reader here that you may not be trustworthy. I mean why would you not wish to have a sensible serious debate over this?

So let's try again.

It seems strange also that you say regarding the alleged extortion and escrow debacles that you have no interest because there are layers of .... bitching, bile, bickering.... this again seems a very weak excuse for not investigating deeply yourself. You are in a position of trust. You should find it your duty to investigate and use all information possible to find the truth qwk should you not?

 Do you say that I  bitch, spit bile and bicker??  Please explain what exactly you mean?

Come let us not become hostile toward each other again. I am only hoping to assist you to do the correct and honest thing. You will thank me genuinely once you realise the mistake you have been making by allowing someone who is a proven liar to dupe you into including them into a position of trust.

You still have not even told me which of my "opinions" you disagree with? if you tell me and you wish to locate the truth I will try to help you find it. If you do not want the truth and are not interested in the truth just tell me that and I will not bother trying to help you further.

I'm glad you recognise this. I would personally see the end of all self moderated threads and local rules bullshit. People can post relevant on topic facts or opinions they substantiate with corroborating events etc or just refrain from posting. This is how the entire board should function for max efficiency.

There is no doubt that the goal is righteous. The method is for others to debate but i see it as no different as the DT's methods and they seem to shy away from anything unmoderated and now insist they can introduce echo chambers in meta via their "local rules".  So why can others not do as they like without that having negative implications.

For me personally I see it more as a "if you can do it....so can we" decision. I don't feel any information could come to light that would refute successfully what has been demonstrated with observable events/facts.

If you look i see a few posts there by those that are not pro "the movement".

Lauda does some good, I have praised it in the past however using red trust to bully or silence truth needs to be fixed or they need to be removed. There is no other sensible solution. This is not blackmail this is simply undo your wrong deeds or people will get upset at unfair treatment and expecting them to take it lying down is ........ unrealistic and unfair.

I guess we may never find out. Shame because the thread contained information i have previously linked to. Must block quote rather than link to the post in future.

anyway i guess question answered cheers for all replies.

perhaps mod will comment later on why he was banned.

Negative THREADS not one post that is makes a very valid point. That entire discussion must be viewed to understand the collision.

One instance and not an example of what you claimed... and if you read the entire thread not just one post  I clearly state the point is valid. People can read the entire thread and make their own minds up. Bring me lots more - - "the sheer number of negative ...blabla"

I will peruse your posts in a few mins and locate some political bolstering of your pals for which you get or give merit. Of course with merit there is no abuse possible since there is such a degree of subjectivity. But clearly a substantial number your posts and your pals that receive and give merit are mostly just actions to bolster and support each others politics here. I can only see 120 days back how to see merit since - it was introduced? are you a merit source or not?

So anyway just gave a quick glance over you 120days merit

Now actually I will not say at all that you are a shit poster whom deserves no merits. Actually I notice I have given you merits for some nice research and I notice some of your posts add value. You are also not actually one of the persons I consider to be INTENTIONALLY fighting against a fairer system. However in my opinion it is clear that there is cycling on political (shared values and pals) which i don't object to but all persons should be allowed to narrow their focus of applying merit too.

let me list some examples it took me 5 mins to find some

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5105851.msg49589048#msg49589048

politically motivated nonsense

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103387.msg49491647#msg49491647

politically motivated nonsense and making fun of a serious cycling of merits

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103387.msg49478856#msg49478856

so much merit so little content look who awards all of this



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5105019.msg49538086#msg49538086

merit endorsement for politics and false claims and assumptions.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093301.msg49053422#msg49053422

merit again for a proven untrustworthy person getting more merits. notice too the others supporting his request...

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093287.msg49057251#msg49057251

post making fun of the fact persons have deep concerns of cycling and another cycler getting merit source
no value in that post from yahoo and another support with merits on this thread after already

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5093287.msg49052232#msg49052232
again notice others meriting


these examples Plus the prior posts I made demonstrates clear that a group of "pals" share political views and even by posting piss taking jokes aligning with those views will get your merits even if those views are incorrect.

I mean there is no doubt that if you post something that aligns with a persons politics even if it is proven incorrect can get you merits here. Or even if the poster posting it is blatantly demonstrating double standards and hypocrisy  will still get them merits if they are pals or their post politically align with their pals.

merit cycling is not always intentional nor to enable manipulation and selfish gain via the systems of control it can be a natural thing like: i meet some cool people who share my views and i enjoy their posts so i look for them and naturally they will attract more merit from me.

 I get this but then sometimes views and opinions form that may not be correct but the group will act as a gang to incorrectly try to stop their views being demonstrated as incorrect. This is okay but not at the expense of having the power to damage other persons accounts whom are correct especially if they are presenting FACTS.

We simply need a system or systems that push for full transparency fairness and equality for each member. Anyone opposing those things is acting selfishly.

Thanks for information. I see if you are the OP the entire thread goes. That is something I was not aware of. Must archive all posts you need in future. I never seen and entire thread just vanish.

Ok mystery solved.

Any any person knows  why he got banned?

This is the usual protocol?

1. the op presented observable fact
2 even if he was nuked (for some reason that is not clear) then the entire thread should not have been nuked like this.

That is rather strange because it has a LOT of very interesting observable events there that should have been left for the record.

Is this the usual result if one person in a thread is banned? or is it because he was the OP?

Yes this is exactly that. They are total scum bags whom will do anything to avoid sensible debate.

They know there is no defense or victory for them when we have evidence and observable events of their REAL untrustworthy behaviours but they still want to be in positions of power to be able to red trust us for things THEY decide don't fit in with how they think things should be done or in extreme cases they will red trust you for daring to speak up and tell the truth that they are the ones that are proven untrustworthy.

However, thule has tried to get these authenticated by theymos and another mod so it is quite apparent that he believes these are real. That rules out the speculation thule is sending these non existent messages to himself. That makes zero sense.

If suchmoons dox has been done before then it could be the correct details for the address in full. If it is then he could have found it on the dox or they were scammed by suchmoon.

Sometimes investigations can take some time. I would expect from the dates one could look at Suchmoons post history from that era to see if there was discussion and interest in such miners.

Really Theymos or mod should investigate because if someone would steal a miner like that and then gloat it is quite disgraceful. Also it would just clear this matter up so we can just know the truth.

The hypocrisy is strong with this proven sock puppet racist trolling sig spammer the pharmacist aka Huge Black Woman.

Trolls? sock puppetting? you say these are negative things....... not that either of those can be proven of these persons you accuse and yet its proven of you mr DT and merit source. FACT

Also to JJG

Your argument seems completely foolish. Lauda is a proven liar, and trust abuser. The fact that you are attempting to cast those that want this recognised and the appropriate action taken in a negative light and suggest blacklisting them is ludicrous and actually makes you look untrustworthy. Best to remove proven liars once you are in full knowledge of their prior actions else of course it will reflect poorly upon your judgement and can only speculate that as persons spot this kind of behaviour you will get more exclusions. According to suchmoon those supporting "possible" scams can be given red trust so I would expect fans of his may reason those knowingly supporting proven liars and trust abusers on DT .... well you can see where that is going.

I don't feel that pointing out wrong doing and insisting those in positions of trust here recognise this and meet there responsibility to remove such wrong doers else they will therefore be viewed as non useful in such a position can be classed as blackmail. That is the unsound and messed up logic I have heard voiced here before by trust abusers.

Don't support proven liars into positions of trust then expect to be viewed as trustworthy.

Oppps I see to a proven sock puppet trolling sig spammer some may consider that to be untrustworthy to support such a person on DT too . I can't really say. 

sadly for you guys I have damaged my hand in a slight accident so I will be typing lot less until it is better since to type with one hand is way way slower and a post of 1000 words taking perhaps 10 mins -15mins is now going to be perhaps 1 hour or even greater..

So xtraelv you are missing my point i feel. It is perfectly legit to merit according to political views even if you openly state this so long as the post is providing value and is merit worthy. The motive should not be relevant or considered for the purposes of merit because the post itself should stand on its own to be analysed objectively.

I mean to say you do not merit in a politically driven manner is quite unlikely let's check out your bpip (this is only the top10 if feel the top20 would give an even more clear picture.

Favorite profiles to send sMerit to
Profile   Number   Sum
suchmoon   29   29
taikuri13   19   19
Lafu   3   19
theymos   10   10
marlboroza   9   9
o_e_l_e_o   9   9
morvillz7z   9   9
DdmrDdmr   8   8
ICOEthics   8   8
The Pharmacist   8   8


suchmoon   31   155
Vod   12   71
BitcoinFX   2   51
Spidersbox   1   50
cryptodevil   3   46
qwk   14   35
TMAN   10   30
bones261   17   28
LoyceV   21   26
paxmao   14   25


Now that is kind of telling is it not I mean I see many names there that are listed in the OP


now I wonder about your own dt inclusions exclusions

included by

1miau
         Alex_Sr
         Bitze
         Coolcryptovator
         DJ1554
         DarkStar_alt
         DdmrDdmr
         Epicyclic
         ICOEthics
         Lafu
         TMAN
         The Pharmacist
         cryptodevil
         iasenko
         marlboroza
         morvillz7z
         owlcatz
         qwk
         r1s2g3
         suchmoon
         taikuri13
         theyoungmillionaire
         tmfp

you include

        1miau
         AUKING
         Alex_Sr
         Bigjohnson124
         Coolcryptovator
         DJ1554
         DarkStar_
         DdmrDdmr
         Hhampuz
         ICOEthics
         Lafu
         LoyceV
         Lutpin
         Mitchell
         MySeriousFaceIsOn
         Pieter Wuille
         Rumhurius
         The Pharmacist
         TripleHeXXX
         Veleor
         Vod
         Welsh
         Xal0lex
         actmyname
         bones261
         coinlocket$
         cryptodevil
         dooglus
         gmaxwell
         gost111
         hilariousandco
         hilariousetc
         iasenko
         ibminer
         marlboroza
         minerjones
         morvillz7z
         mprep
         nutildah
         o_e_l_e_o
         owlcatz
         pazor_true
         phantastisch
         qwk
         suchmoon
         taikuri13
         theymos
         theyoungmillionaire
         tmfp
         waya
         xandry

now I see there once again these contain the exact persons that I have mentioned before.

so from a board of 150k users now it is a big coincidence that this you find their posts the most worthy of merit and amazingly they find your posts most worthy of merit.  

You feel they should be on DT and they feel you should be on DT


What is even more freakish is that the entire circle also feel a huge proportion of the same people need to be excluded from DT.


Now what you are seeing on my trust list and the others trust lists is a RESPONSE to the circling of merits and the manipulation and abuse of DT . This abuse is proven but sadly the subjectivity of the systems of control allow for the deniability of collusion when everything else points to it.

So to recap.

I am saying there is nothing wrong with political meriting as long as the post is merit worthy. This is of course not fair because you will be withholding merit from others by not viewing their posts as much or if you dislike them or their posts are not in agreement politically with  your views or the views that enable you personally to benefit from these systems then these will be strongly resisted.

I mean let me take the rest of your post

"I just believe that with the sheer number of negative threads you make in various places, the unwarranted personal attacks that you have made on me and others and the feedback that you have left previously for others and the people you trust and distrust does not align with my values. "

1. point me to the negative posts
2. the unwarranted personal attacks.

You do realise my MO is simply

Criteria be set for DT and Merit that ensures fair and equal treatment of all persons here. Can you show me a post of mine that does not seem to be pushing for that ??

My posts only seem negative to those that the status quo suites better than the fairer system I would like to see introduced.

Please think about this post before you reply.

@qwk

post of 1000 words starts below because the other one was for xtraelv


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

1. you quoted me and it says there... facts and Reasonable conclusions based on evidence or corroborating events then went on to only address each of my points and measure them against what you would consider a FACT. You made no further mention of reasonable conclusions based on corroborating evidence/events. This was kind of thing I would not expect from you. Let's us be sensible and reasonable with each other. I mean we both understand many things would fail the threshold of a fact but are reasonable or highly probable and therefore still worthy of deep consideration.

Now to test out if you are going to accept Facts and Facts I must ask you for a 3rd time to review a what I consider to be a fact and see if you will consider it to be a fact too. Now since you have promised to answer me I am hoping you will do so now. Then after establishing this I will make what I find to be a reasonable statement based on that fact and you will tell me if it is reasonable or if not you will explain why it is not reasonable. After clearing that up we should move to the other points in my post that you and I shall debate and see if my "opinions" are reasonable or not or if some are indeed facts.

This is regarding a project that annouced a fair pow launch (no premine/instamine)

It then did this

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.msg7535561#msg7535561

he made these comments on many occasions over many months we had quite a few arguments over it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=560138.msg6748208#msg6748208

Now this is clearly a financially motivated lie. Scammers are financially motivated liars.

Do you think to have someone on your DT inclusions that has been proven to be a liar and i say a scammer therefore because it is a deception for financial reasons.... so yes why do you include such a person ??

Have you read the full threads in my sig and do you find them to be the actions of a trustworthy person? combined with the fact that he is a liar for financial reasons. How about the extortion attempt or the escrow business? what are your opinons on those?

I am trying to sample your thoughts so that I can see this high threshold of acceptance of facts or reasonable/probable explanation in light of observable /corroborating events and circumstances.

I would like to hear your detailed thoughts on these things which I say are very relevant to the OP because if you are not politically motivated and you are objective that will be welcome news. I thought we may have got off to a bad start but i was impressed at your cool nature even when I was swearing at you. I need to learn this type of coolness myself.  I feel it will certainly help me convey my thoughts to a wider audience.

let's get this sad pathetic loser added to the excludes

~Alone055

reason -  this sad little gimp comes to my thread  that is a sensible reasonable request for clarification of why stingers was excluded from merit source  and attempted to falsely brand them as trolling. He is a annoying negative shitposting troll himself.

I posted this thread

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5107640

and he comes and tries to derail and cast off as trolling certainly an ass kisser to untrustworthy scoundrels.