Warning about Carra23 -

[warning re carra23]

A few weeks ago, HashManiacMining was running a giveaway in the GamesAndRounds section. There was one post in particular that Carra23 specifically wanted removed from the thread. Unfortunately, the thread has since been moved to the trashcan, however below is a quote of the post that Carra23 wanted so desperately to be removed:

We are just sorting through the applicants.

As described no-one with duplicated will get an account at all.


All the below have been detected as the same person.

5371 sumansen31@rediffmail.com
5372 coinshot@gmx.us
5376 widley@rediffmail.com
5379 tinnyeye@rediffmail.com
5380 carra23@zoho.com
5381 lazywhale@mailinator.com

lol thats some work he did there

On it's surface, this contains roughly zero information. Doing further research however, it seems that all except one of the email addresses have the same name as a bitcointalk.org account.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=122354 Carra23
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=217933 TinEye
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=103183 sumantso
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=225241 Coinshot
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=388740 LazyWhale

With this being said, there is nothing wrong with using multiple accounts. This account in fact is an alternate account (duh).

These accounts also have something else in common. The only address that any of these accounts has ever posted, which also matches the address in their respective profiles also just so happen to belong to cryptsy

1Q4jmiMCsWuUvyyTfYcpiUAQqZcHTPn4yW - sumantso proof - archive of profile
1H1SjQ2ddWgwrNHgNjuptuL7THEq1zB9Mh - TinEye - proof - archive of profile
1EDCG7VybqSFouPFpPbYMN314JoUnbPxXi - Coinshot - proof - archive of profile
12ujKCei3GAp85mbfDic65i5XnLoV2HNgQ - Carra23 - proof - archive of profile

Two of these accounts are enrolled in bitdice.me signature campaign. If you were to look at the transaction of the last time bitdice.me paid out their signature campaign you would see that the following addresses were paid that also belong to cryptsy:

1EKc42nPdAZhWu7XKswHB4qSzwLM2CvAtw - Fernandez - proof - archive of profile
15d4885Q9Thw7v9a1qJgSndQNLtyzS5TLo - goosoodude - proof - archive of profile

Very strangely, two of these accounts are now wearing the signature for casino evolution even though their signature campaign appears to have ended several months ago.

Now you ask, is there anything wrong with any of this? You ask, does this break any rules? The answer to these questions is 'no'. With that being said, all of these accounts have similar posting histories. These accounts also have posting histories that do not create strong posts, many would probably consider them to be spam-like posts.

Is it appropriate to trust someone to choose the strongest signature campaign participants when he himself has a long history of making spam-like posts? I cannot answer that question.

Is it appropriate to trust someone to  choose the strongest signature campaign participants when he himself has many accounts enrolled in multiple signature campaigns that pay a lot on a per-post basis? I cannot answer that question for you.

The following information is upon information and belief: A few months ago, Carra23 had contacted a few moderators and a few default trust members regarding marcotheminer, trying to get him banned for sending unsolicited PM's for trying to poach participants from carra23's campaigns, a few of which he was able to poach successfully. The issue with this is that carra23 engages in this very same behavior with other signature campaigns.

Both marcotheminer and carra23 appear to be large sources of spam within the forum, however I cannot see how one can ethically justify trying to get someone banned for doing one thing that they themselves engage in.

[unsoindovo]

Thank you very much for the tip!
...and if this is true...
Some bct users can have multiple account with out proplems.
Others user are "killed" if they use multiple account...

This is democracy?
Hum. I know it with other name ! :O

[Quickseller]

Thank you very much for the tip!
...and if this is true...
Some bct users can have multiple account with out proplems.
Others user are "killed" if they use multiple account...

This is democracy?
Hum. I know it with other name ! :O

There are no rules against having multiple accounts. Although the low post quality is a sign that they are creating more spam then they should.

Some of these appear to have participated in luckyb.it's signature campaign which only allows one account per person to participate (in any signature campaign) and he probably used unique cryptsy addresses for his "coin control" - this appears to be a pretty good way to avoid detection of his alts. I wonder if all of them can be confirmed to be his or not.

[jacktheking]

Sound suspicious. Watching this thread. I tried to applied for a campaign which Carra23 was the manager and he/she said that my posts "alternate between quality and filler". He or she then suggested me to join BitBingo.io campaign. I rejected and stay with 777Coin campaign. Now.. looking at those accounts posts which you mentioned.. I feel.. *you know*.

[warning re carra23]

Sound suspicious. Watching this thread. I tried to applied for a campaign which Carra23 was the manager and he/she said that my posts "alternate between quality and filler". He or she then suggested me to join BitBingo.io campaign. I rejected and stay with 777Coin campaign. Now.. looking at those accounts posts which you mentioned.. I feel.. *you know*.

Which campaign was this? Do you remember if anyone participated who had a lot of shit posts in the alt-coin sections?

[khawaja07]

Sound suspicious. Watching this thread. I tried to applied for a campaign which Carra23 was the manager and he/she said that my posts "alternate between quality and filler". He or she then suggested me to join BitBingo.io campaign. I rejected and stay with 777Coin campaign. Now.. looking at those accounts posts which you mentioned.. I feel.. *you know*.

Which campaign was this? Do you remember if anyone participated who had a lot of shit posts in the alt-coin sections?

nice job done by you..
desperation always leads to problems..
its not only carra..he thinks to dominate the forum..
i dont know what infos you gave are right or wrong..but the theme of desperation is correc..i agree with you.

[warning re carra23]

Sound suspicious. Watching this thread. I tried to applied for a campaign which Carra23 was the manager and he/she said that my posts "alternate between quality and filler". He or she then suggested me to join BitBingo.io campaign. I rejected and stay with 777Coin campaign. Now.. looking at those accounts posts which you mentioned.. I feel.. *you know*.

Which campaign was this? Do you remember if anyone participated who had a lot of shit posts in the alt-coin sections?

nice job done by you..
desperation always leads to problems..
its not only carra..he thinks to dominate the forum..
i dont know what infos you gave are right or wrong..but the theme of desperation is correc..i agree with you.

I am more certain about the ones matching the email addresses. I am less certain about the others

[Carra23]

Thank you very much for the tip!
...and if this is true...
Some bct users can have multiple account with out proplems.
Others user are "killed" if they use multiple account...

This is democracy?
Hum. I know it with other name ! :O

There are no rules against having multiple accounts. Although the low post quality is a sign that they are creating more spam then they should.

Some of these appear to have participated in luckyb.it's signature campaign which only allows one account per person to participate (in any signature campaign) and he probably used unique cryptsy addresses for his "coin control" - this appears to be a pretty good way to avoid detection of his alts. I wonder if all of them can be confirmed to be his or not.

First ndnhc, now me; who is next?

At least post through your main account. That way it will not break your Bit-x signature posting rules (if they are still the same), but I guess your collaborator marcotheminer does not have any problems for this.

[OrangeSeller]

Is this quick seller? The writing style is the same

[Finchy]

Is this quick seller? The writing style is the same

Of course it is. Its not exactly hard to tell but people need to drop their egos and all this tit for tatt attacks that are going on. People are so quick to judge each other the moment they find something that they can use against someone its pounced upon regardless of how relevent it is to anything.

[Quickseller]

Thank you very much for the tip!
...and if this is true...
Some bct users can have multiple account with out proplems.
Others user are "killed" if they use multiple account...

This is democracy?
Hum. I know it with other name ! :O

There are no rules against having multiple accounts. Although the low post quality is a sign that they are creating more spam then they should.

Some of these appear to have participated in luckyb.it's signature campaign which only allows one account per person to participate (in any signature campaign) and he probably used unique cryptsy addresses for his "coin control" - this appears to be a pretty good way to avoid detection of his alts. I wonder if all of them can be confirmed to be his or not.

First ndnhc, now me; who is next?

At least post through your main account. That way it will not break your Bit-x signature posting rules (if they are still the same), but I guess your collaborator marcotheminer does not have any problems for this.

The evidence against ndnhc was good. After pointing out the evidence to a number of reputable people, they all came to the same conclusion.

You seem to be the only person that was not wearing a DaDice signature that came to the conclusion that ndnhc was framed. And no the fact that ndnhc is a 'nice guy' is not evidence that he was framed.

Back on topic, I am not sure how you think I have access to the trashcan or how I have access to either PM's with staff or the report logs.

[erwin45hacked]

Is it appropriate to trust someone to  choose the strongest signature campaign participants when he himself has many accounts enrolled in multiple signature campaigns that pay a lot on a per-post basis? I cannot answer that question for you.

I think carra is just doing his job, he choose the best participants for the campaign because he wanted to do the best for the campaign and I dont see that as not appropriate . Well if we do our job then we may want to do it to get the best result, this could be why carra is choosing only few people

[warning re carra23]

I think I have missed one of Carra23's alts.

peligro uses 1CoDQxpfFRjkgCgYD9fCz3YeTsTcas4LdG which also belongs in cryptsy proof - archive of profile

In addition to the above, he continued his enrollment in bitdice.me one post before TinEye did the same. See here.

@Carra23 - are these your alts? How can you advertise your services when you have so many accounts enrolled in signature deals? How many of your alts have you accepted into your own campaigns?

[DiamondCardz]

Another anonymous warrior. Well, I don't blame ya I suppose, that's fair enough.

I trust Carra though, I don't think he'd have any reason to have alts. He's a pretty stand-up guy and I'm fairly sure he gets a decent enough revenue from managing signature campaigns that he wouldn't want to risk that for...this...?

[PolarPoint]

The forum has enough finger pointing for this month. Give this a rest please. OP gives proof of a few forum accounts who uses cryptsy addresses. The link of these accounts to carra23 is weak. There must be many other members using exchange addresses for sig campaigns, then all of them must belong to carra23?

[warning re carra23]

The forum has enough finger pointing for this month. Give this a rest please. OP gives proof of a few forum accounts who uses cryptsy addresses. The link of these accounts to carra23 is weak. There must be many other members using exchange addresses for sig campaigns, then all of them must belong to carra23?

The link is in their email addresses. All of the emails match the handles of their bitcointalk.org accounts.

This is not a claim of a scam. It is merely a warning to others that Carra23 is not as anti-spam as he claims to be

[unsoindovo]

The forum has enough finger pointing for this month. Give this a rest please. OP gives proof of a few forum accounts who uses cryptsy addresses. The link of these accounts to carra23 is weak. There must be many other members using exchange addresses for sig campaigns, then all of them must belong to carra23?

The link is in their email addresses. All of the emails match the handles of their bitcointalk.org accounts.

This is not a claim of a scam. It is merely a warning to others that Carra23 is not as anti-spam as he claims to be

I think theymos could help us to understand if the behaviour if carra23 and his signature farming if is true or not.
He can scan in deep the log of each account and let US know the truth.
I hope theymos read this thread and post some info

[hilariousandco]

The forum has enough finger pointing for this month. Give this a rest please. OP gives proof of a few forum accounts who uses cryptsy addresses. The link of these accounts to carra23 is weak. There must be many other members using exchange addresses for sig campaigns, then all of them must belong to carra23?

The link is in their email addresses. All of the emails match the handles of their bitcointalk.org accounts.

This is not a claim of a scam. It is merely a warning to others that Carra23 is not as anti-spam as he claims to be

I think theymos could help us to understand if the behaviour if carra23 and his signature farming if is true or not.
He can scan in deep the log of each account and let US know the truth.
I hope theymos read this thread and post some info

Having multiple accounts whether they're on the same campaign or not isn't against the forum rules though individual campaigns may disallow it, but that's up to the owners or the campaign managers to police not the staff or admins. Maybe they might get involved if there's some evidence or suspicion of wrongdoing/scamming but this doesn't really look like a scam accusation either.

[marcotheminer]

Thank you very much for the tip!
...and if this is true...
Some bct users can have multiple account with out proplems.
Others user are "killed" if they use multiple account...

This is democracy?
Hum. I know it with other name ! :O

There are no rules against having multiple accounts. Although the low post quality is a sign that they are creating more spam then they should.

Some of these appear to have participated in luckyb.it's signature campaign which only allows one account per person to participate (in any signature campaign) and he probably used unique cryptsy addresses for his "coin control" - this appears to be a pretty good way to avoid detection of his alts. I wonder if all of them can be confirmed to be his or not.

First ndnhc, now me; who is next?

At least post through your main account. That way it will not break your Bit-x signature posting rules (if they are still the same), but I guess your collaborator marcotheminer does not have any problems for this.

What even are you talking about?

[Quickseller]

The forum has enough finger pointing for this month. Give this a rest please. OP gives proof of a few forum accounts who uses cryptsy addresses. The link of these accounts to carra23 is weak. There must be many other members using exchange addresses for sig campaigns, then all of them must belong to carra23?

The link is in their email addresses. All of the emails match the handles of their bitcointalk.org accounts.

This is not a claim of a scam. It is merely a warning to others that Carra23 is not as anti-spam as he claims to be

I think theymos could help us to understand if the behaviour if carra23 and his signature farming if is true or not.
He can scan in deep the log of each account and let US know the truth.
I hope theymos read this thread and post some info

Having multiple accounts whether they're on the same campaign or not isn't against the forum rules though individual campaigns may disallow it, but that's up to the owners or the campaign managers to police not the staff or admins. Maybe they might get involved if there's some evidence or suspicion of wrongdoing/scamming but this doesn't really look like a scam accusation either.

I think this thread was in reputation before, I wonder why the OP moved it.

It doesn't look like any scam is even being accused in this thread. It does look like there may be some conflict of interest in his avatar campaign though.