Bitcoin Forum
June 17, 2019, 04:22:31 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Scammer tag: Nefario.  (Read 17140 times)
SaltySpitoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1834


Welcome to the SaltySpitoon, how Tough are ya?


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 01:20:09 PM
 #141

You know its going to be a good day when Goat, and two Moderators are arguing amongst themselves, making them look like jackasses. Moderator calling out other Moderators, and Goat being involved? (Well I guess the Goat thing is normal) but Badbear, you should really be ashamed of yourself...



Protecting your reputation as a "scammer investigator" Roll Eyes. You once tried to threaten someone with a scammer tag for saying he slept with Pirate's sister as a joke. I'm glad theymos doesn't trust you enough to apply tags yourself, that looks to have been a good call on his part.  

Yeah that sure is the attitude that makes someone want to use the forums, mods bashing other mods... Feel free to have different opinions, but I believe you two should probably have some sort of professional relationship? You are representing BTC-Talk, and its looking more and more like a shit hole every day because of these long drawn out drama threads.

WHEN THERE IS A SCAM INVESTIGATION, AND THE PERSON GETS THE TAG, LOCK THE THREAD! Do we really need to discuss it for the upcoming few years?

It would be nice to know why some one got a tag...

aren't you just upset that he didn't get the tag for delisting your assets, but instead for shutting down a major exchange with no warning, leaving investors in the black, with asset holders and listers scrambling for a way to fix this, but instead of providing any info at all, or any form of solution, just not responding at all?

If you are genuinely interested in Nefario's scammer tag for reasons other than what I said, then I apologize.


*Edit*  ^ Apologize to Goat, not Badbear for looking like an ass.

.FORTUNE.JACK.
      ▄▄███████▄▄
   ▄████▀▀ ▄ ██████▄
  ████ ▄▄███ ████████
 █████▌▐███▌ ▀▄ ▀█████
███████▄██▀▀▀▀▄████████
█████▀▄▄▄▄█████████████
████▄▄▄▄ █████████████
 ██████▌ ███▀████████
  ███████▄▀▄████████
   ▀█████▀▀███████▀
      ▀▀██████▀▀
         
         █
...FortuneJack.com                                             
...THE BIGGEST BITCOIN GAMBLING SITE
       ▄▄█████████▄▄
    ▄█████████████████▄
  ▄█████████████████████▄
 ▄██
█████████▀███████████▄
██████████▀   ▀██████████
█████████▀       ▀█████████
████████           ████████
████████▄   ▄ ▄   ▄████████
██████████▀   ▀██████████
 ▀██
█████████████████████▀
  ▀██
███████████████████▀
    ▀█████████████████▀
       ▀▀█████████▀▀
#JACKMATE
WIN 1 BTC
▄█████████████████████████▄
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
██████████▀█████▀██████████
███████▀░░▀░░░░░▀░░▀███████
██████▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐██████
██████░░░░██░░░██░░░░██████
█████▌░░░░▀▀░░░▀▀░░░░▐█████
██████▄░░▄▄▄░░░▄▄▄░░▄██████
████████▄▄███████▄▄████████

███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████▀

Mine RVN and with 0% mining fees and get paid in BTC, ETH, XMR or RVN.

www.cudominer.com Get Cudo Miner
Auto coin switching, third-party miners, overclocking and remote management (Win/Linux)
Run from a USB stick or install from an ISO image (Linux)
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1560788551
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1560788551

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1560788551
Reply with quote  #2

1560788551
Report to moderator
1560788551
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1560788551

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1560788551
Reply with quote  #2

1560788551
Report to moderator
BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1025



View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 02:07:48 PM
 #142

Quote
I also do not understand why when I ask them to explain why I only get insulted

Because I did explain, almost two weeks ago. Like I said, I'm not going to explain myself over and over just because you don't like the answer, and not doing so doesn't make me wrong, just means I find repeating myself annoying. At some point we just have to agree to disagree. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.msg1258773#msg1258773


1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 03:06:09 PM
 #143

Nefario did not shut down GLBSE...

https://glbse.com/
Quote
GLBSE is closed
Please login to get your bitcoin and assets.

You are dense as fuck. Ever thought of changing your username from Goat to Donkey?

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 03:13:40 PM
 #144

Nefario did not shut down GLBSE...

https://glbse.com/
Quote
GLBSE is closed
Please login to get your bitcoin and assets.

You are dense as fuck. Ever thought of changing your username from Goat to Donkey?

Please log in?? You clearly see it is operating only with all of the assets delisted...

If you really think that GLBSE has been shut down I lol!   It is with out a doubt in operation.



If it's operating then please, register an account there and list an asset. It's that easy to prove me wrong, Donkey... errr... Goat.

fbastage
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 367
Merit: 100



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 03:20:04 PM
 #145

McGoats, that meets my definition of 'closed'.  The 'exchange' is not operating as an exchange.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 03:23:44 PM
 #146

Nefario did not shut down GLBSE...

https://glbse.com/
Quote
GLBSE is closed
Please login to get your bitcoin and assets.

You are dense as fuck. Ever thought of changing your username from Goat to Donkey?

Please log in?? You clearly see it is operating only with all of the assets delisted...

If you really think that GLBSE has been shut down I lol!   It is with out a doubt in operation.



If it's operating then please, register an account there and list an asset. It's that easy to prove me wrong, Donkey... errr... Goat.

I edited/added to my above post you might want to reread it as I answered you. And yeah a staff member calling me names cuz I point out truths, class act...



Nefario told the other shareholders glbse is not coming back.

Most likely the new site would not be called glbse to remove the "stock exchange" reference. Stocks and bonds also wouldnt be called those names.

GLBSE is finished so deal with it.

Raoul Duke
aka psy
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1000



View Profile
October 19, 2012, 03:26:09 PM
 #147

And yeah a staff member calling me names cuz I point out truths, class act...

I'm not a "Staff Member" here. And even on the 2 boards where I am a "Staff Member", 99,99% of the time I speak for myself. Deal with it.
But nice try at poisining the discussion with unrelated matters, Donkey.

Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 03:35:58 PM
 #148

McGoats, that meets my definition of 'closed'.  The 'exchange' is not operating as an exchange.

Even if you think GLBSE right now is closed there is no where in the by-laws that says GLBSE can not be closed. Also 70% of the owners think GLBSE should be operating in this way...

The by-laws were set up to manage GLBSE and that is what is going on. GLBSE is trying to take a legal path.  Theymos lost a vote to remove Nefario and then was unable to sell his shares. Theymos did not even want his shares anyway, he wanted to pass them on to some sucker...

The exchange is operating with all of the assets delisted. It was made more than clear Nefario had the right to delist all of my assets. If he can do me, why not everyone else? Hypocritical much?




Nefario lied when he said only 30% voted against him. It was actually 47%


Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 03:46:41 PM
 #149

McGoats, that meets my definition of 'closed'.  The 'exchange' is not operating as an exchange.

Even if you think GLBSE right now is closed there is no where in the by-laws that says GLBSE can not be closed. Also 70% of the owners think GLBSE should be operating in this way...

The by-laws were set up to manage GLBSE and that is what is going on. GLBSE is trying to take a legal path.  Theymos lost a vote to remove Nefario and then was unable to sell his shares. Theymos did not even want his shares anyway, he wanted to pass them on to some sucker...

The exchange is operating with all of the assets delisted. It was made more than clear Nefario had the right to delist all of my assets. If he can do me, why not everyone else? Hypocritical much?




Nefario lied when he said only 30% voted against him. It was actually 47%



Fine, What was needed to remove him? 50% 66% ?

I bet it was more than 47% so he did not scam anyone...


The only one who voted to keep Nefario was Nefario himself.

BadBear
v2.0
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652
Merit: 1025



View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 04:41:09 PM
Last edit: October 19, 2012, 09:21:10 PM by BadBear
 #150

Lol! So you guys went into this knowing he had control of the company and then you all (well theymos) got upset when he wanted to move in a different direction?

I'm not sure why you think he controls the company when he only owns ~24% of the shares. That's the whole point, he did this without the consent of the shareholders, the real owners. The fact that he can do it just because he has physical access to the server doesn't mean he has the right to.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You can keep making a thousand hypothetical excuses for him and speculating on this or that, but unfortunately some of us have to deal with fact.

1Kz25jm6pjNTaz8bFezEYUeBYfEtpjuKRG | PGP: B5797C4F

Tired of annoying signature ads? Ad block for signatures
stochastic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 05:19:38 PM
 #151


Fine, What was needed to remove him? 50% 66% ?

I bet it was more than 47% so he did not scam anyone...


The only one who voted to keep Nefario was Nefario himself.

Didn't theymos say that some other people supported Nefario?

This does not make sense:


He has about 25% of shares, so it wasn't too difficult for him to pass crazy motions like that.

Introducing constraints to the economy only serves to limit what can be economical.
deeplink
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


In cryptography we trust


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 06:40:13 PM
 #152


Nefario lied when he said only 30% voted against him. It was actually 47%



Fine, What was needed to remove him? 50% 66% ?

I bet it was more than 47% so he did not scam anyone...


The only one who voted to keep Nefario was Nefario himself.

Why don't you organize yourselves and do a new vote right now?
chrisrico
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 496
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:01:08 PM
 #153

Why don't you organize yourselves and do a new vote right now?

Because he has stated that even if he was removed as CEO by a shareholder vote, he would continue with his plan to shut down GLBSE.

Anyway, there are a few reasons why the vote to remove Nefario as CEO failed. First, he has a 24% stake in the company. Second, he had a couple of minor supporters. Third, most of those that opposed him in principle were already resigned to the course of events and didn't care to actually take a stand, as even if he was removed, he stated he would shut it down anyway.
stochastic
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 09:50:39 PM
 #154

Why don't you organize yourselves and do a new vote right now?

Because he has stated that even if he was removed as CEO by a shareholder vote, he would continue with his plan to shut down GLBSE.

Anyway, there are a few reasons why the vote to remove Nefario as CEO failed. First, he has a 24% stake in the company. Second, he had a couple of minor supporters. Third, most of those that opposed him in principle were already resigned to the course of events and didn't care to actually take a stand, as even if he was removed, he stated he would shut it down anyway.

Are you a BitcoinGlobal partner?

Introducing constraints to the economy only serves to limit what can be economical.
chrisrico
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 496
Merit: 500


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 10:02:13 PM
Last edit: October 19, 2012, 10:23:31 PM by chrisrico
 #155

Are you a BitcoinGlobal partner?

Yes, I have stated that before. I was one of the ones for which Theymos was selling shares.

After a bit of thought, I'm going to release the October 5th shareholder meeting minutes. The only thing I've done is remove IP addresses and the names of undisclosed shareholders. I'm not outing anyone (other than da2ce7, since he supported the shutdown from the beginning) over this.

http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=DRt78Vne
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 19, 2012, 10:05:31 PM
 #156

McGoats, that meets my definition of 'closed'.  The 'exchange' is not operating as an exchange.

Even if you think GLBSE right now is closed there is no where in the by-laws that says GLBSE can not be closed. Also 70% of the owners think GLBSE should be operating in this way...

The by-laws were set up to manage GLBSE and that is what is going on. GLBSE is trying to take a legal path.  Theymos lost a vote to remove Nefario and then was unable to sell his shares. Theymos did not even want his shares anyway, he wanted to pass them on to some sucker...

The exchange is operating with all of the assets delisted. It was made more than clear Nefario had the right to delist all of my assets. If he can do me, why not everyone else? Hypocritical much?




Nefario lied when he said only 30% voted against him. It was actually 47%



Fine, What was needed to remove him? 50% 66% ?

I bet it was more than 47% so he did not scam anyone...


The only one who voted to keep Nefario was Nefario himself.

Lol! So you guys went into this knowing he had stolen the company and then you all (well theymos) got upset when he wanted to move in a different direction? A legal direction? Where he is going to rename the site and adjust a few things?

Why does he have a scammers tag again? Honestly knowing this makes me think that the shares of bitcoin global are wortha whole lot more than they were when he was running an illegal site. So NadBear saying Nefario closed down operations is a lie. Also saying he destroyed the value of the shares is a lie...

Theymos and BadBear still in my mind should have the scammers tag if anyone will (assuming delisting assets is cool and all)... seems like abuse of power... They used the scammers tag to try to make Nefario do what they wanted him to do even thought they knew he had total control. Oh man, what abuse.



FTFY

repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 19, 2012, 11:57:10 PM
Last edit: October 20, 2012, 12:14:28 AM by repentance
 #157



After a bit of thought, I'm going to release the October 5th shareholder meeting minutes. The only thing I've done is remove IP addresses and the names of undisclosed shareholders. I'm not outing anyone (other than da2ce7, since he supported the shutdown from the beginning) over this.

http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=DRt78Vne

Thank you.

I'm a little confused about this bit.

Quote from: nefario
the idea that I've given 15K USD worth of something to an anonymous person "to hold" looks really fucking bad for me

This implies that theymos' RL identity isn't known to the other GLBSE shareholders.  Is that the case, because it's not hard to find apparent RL information regarding theymos. 

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Bitcoin Oz
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686
Merit: 500


Wat


View Profile WWW
October 20, 2012, 02:23:49 AM
 #158



After a bit of thought, I'm going to release the October 5th shareholder meeting minutes. The only thing I've done is remove IP addresses and the names of undisclosed shareholders. I'm not outing anyone (other than da2ce7, since he supported the shutdown from the beginning) over this.

http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=DRt78Vne

Thank you.

I'm a little confused about this bit.

Quote from: nefario
the idea that I've given 15K USD worth of something to an anonymous person "to hold" looks really fucking bad for me

This implies that theymos' RL identity isn't known to the other GLBSE shareholders.  Is that the case, because it's not hard to find apparent RL information regarding theymos. 






For the purposes pf AML you cant just say "this is the person" without showing their documents to prove it. Theymos is known doesnt mean he has ever sent Nefario his DL or electric bill. For all intents and purposes the other "shareholders" are invisible.

repentance
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868
Merit: 1000


View Profile
October 20, 2012, 02:48:59 AM
 #159

For the purposes pf AML you cant just say "this is the person" without showing their documents to prove it. Theymos is known doesnt mean he has ever sent Nefario his DL or electric bill. For all intents and purposes the other "shareholders" are invisible.

Regardless of whether identity information is required to formally create a business entity - and, for the most part, it is these days for office-bearers and significant shareholders alike - there's no way I'd even consider entering a business partnership with someone without proof of their real world identity.

All I can say is that this is Bitcoin. I don't believe it until I see six confirmations.
Maged
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260
Merit: 1006


View Profile
October 20, 2012, 03:39:44 AM
Last edit: October 20, 2012, 03:54:23 AM by Maged
 #160

Goat, I agree completely. You guys haven't seen this, but I've been very vocal about this behind-the-scenes ever since the tag was applied, with almost the same arguments. I was hoping that BadBear would listen, but at this point I need to start protecting my reputation by letting you guys know my position.

So you don't think that Nefario's actions toward BitcoinGlobal shareholders were worthy of the scam tag?
Nope. He was and remains CEO, so he has the sole authority on how to run the company unless/until a shareholder vote says otherwise. If he were properly removed as CEO and didn't hand the entire site, it's databases, and any business funds in his possession to his successor, then he'd be a scammer. In fact, you guys have/had the ability to do this on your own, without his cooperation. Thus, you could argue that any shareholder that refuses to vote to remove Nefario is a scammer. So far, this hasn't been requested.

Goat, I agree completely. You guys haven't seen this, but I've been very vocal about this behind-the-scenes ever since the tag was applied, with almost the same arguments. I was hoping that BadBear would listen, but at this point I need to start protecting my reputation by letting you guys know my position.

Are you sure you agree with Goat? As far as you've said you think Nefario doesn't deserve a scammer tag at all. Goat thinks he does, just not for the same reasons I do, which is fine.
However, those other reasons were rejected/not decided upon. If you are willing to say that Nefario delisting anybody deserves a scammer tag, and theymos agrees, I will drop this whole argument. I want theymos to agree so that I may use this as precedent in future investigations.

There may be other reasons for Nefario to have a scammer tag but since he already has one it's largely academic at this point.
Exactly! I could care less about Nefario, I'm just worried about the precedent this will cause. Thus, this really is just academic. That being said, you'll need to clarify those other reasons.

Also, are you sure you have no conflict of interest here? I'm beginning to wish I hadn't been so quick to dismiss claims of you conspiring with Nefario earlier. Given things I have found out about others, I'm beginning to wonder if there's things about you we don't know. I do get the feeling that you're trying to protect something by trying to pressure me into removing the tag, but I don't think it's your reputation.
Yes, and as you know, I already answered this. Honestly, the fact that you asked this again in almost the same manner as some of our trolls shows that you're starting to act irrational. Trust me, as a friend, from my own experience with this case: take a break from scammer investigations for a day or two. Totally block out this forum in your preferences during that break to allow you to clear your thoughts. I'm only telling you this because that is exactly what I did.

You ruined your own reputation when you tried to force goat to take illegal actions in order to avoid getting a scammer tag (so Nefario wouldn't get it). Coercing someone to take illegal actions in order to protect Nefario is pretty scummy, and I'm glad others called you out on it before I had to step in, and also threatening to ban Goat for lying (when you didn't even know if he was).
Yes, I know. I realized that I was acting irresponsibly and did the only proper thing I could: Step down from the case. I'm disappointed that you didn't call me out privately on the matter earlier, though. I would have listened.

Then after you bowed out, you tried to secretly insert yourself back into the process for the sole and only purpose of denying the tag. Not even to give it out, just to deny it. And I turned you down saying it would look fishy, and it looks fishy that you even tried. Protecting your reputation as a "scammer investigator" Roll Eyes.
And I agreed, which is why I requested that both you and theymos approve my request to reclaim veto power. Just to be clear, because you denied that request (which I explicitly said you could), I am only acting as a regular user in this case. I would appreciate it if I were treated that way.

You once tried to threaten someone with a scammer tag for saying he slept with Pirate's sister as a joke. I'm glad theymos doesn't trust you enough to apply tags yourself, that looks to have been a good call on his part. 
As for the reason for the request, I later realized (after I had some time to cool down and get ahold of myself) that in my irrational fit, I irresponsibly gave sole authority for the scammer tag to a single person. No one - not me, not you, not even theymos - should have that authority on their own. The point of having one person investigate while the other person has to approve the decision of the investigator that a scammer tag is needed is to both provide another layer of removal from the case so that only the facts are focused on and to prevent one person's irrationality from deciding the case, since if someone is rational most of the time (as a human, it is impossible to always be rational), the chances that at least one person is rational at the time is significantly higher. It's for this reason that I believe that theymos, although he has the ability, should never ban or mark someone as a scammer on his own, unless the case is extremely clear. I'd be interested in what theymos' position on this is, since I don't know whether restricting bans and tags to administrators was done to intentionally create this dynamic, or if he just doesn't trust us. Either way, I'm glad that he set the system up the way he did.

Also, for the record, in neither of these cases did I send a request to theymos to mark someone as a scammer. I may have said that I would, even directly to theymos, but I never did because I always double-check my line of thinking before actually doing that. If I had the ability to do it myself, I also wouldn't have used it at those points.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!