Q: Should Lauda *really* be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no

[BitcoinEXpress]

What a day for Lauda!

Lauda advertises for a company she knows to be shady, get publicly called out about this, waits for her payment and then removes her signature. Not exactly a beacon of ethics if you ask me.

Now Lauda is asking 2BTC per month for her signature and is proactively denying any consequences of advertising for a future shady company: "[...]can not be held accountable for any misdoings by the client"

Anyone that follows Lauda's posts knows that she does not keep an open mind

So he's a shady sig spamming staff member.

Still would be a great mod.

I'm serious, sig spamming etc.... has zero to do with moderating.


~BCX~

[1713567670]

1713567670

[1713567670]

1713567670

[Lauda]

Lauda advertises for a company she knows to be shady, get publicly called out about this, waits for her payment and then removes her signature. Not exactly a beacon of ethics if you ask me.

The evidence was inconclusive (that's why I left neutral trust, but still decided to leave them). "Waits for her payment"; what are you talking about?

Now Lauda is asking 2BTC per month for her signature and is proactively denying any consequences of advertising for a future shady company: "[...]can not be held accountable for any misdoings by the client"

No, neither one of those is correct. ACE is asking 2 BTC for the whole group (not myself). The secondary implies that in the case that a client goes rogue (e.g. scams) during an AD period (not prior) that we can't be held accountable for this in any way.

So he's a shady sig spamming staff member.

Shady? No, I haven't done anything wrong, don't let yourself fooled by the 'anti-Lauda' movement.

I'm serious, sig spamming etc.... has zero to do with moderating.

That is correct.

[defcon23]

to the question : "Should Lauda *really* be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no"

The answer is clearly NO.
how call someone abusing of this position for trying extorquing someone in this way ??

resume:  1 : Lauda collect genesis coins serie 2,
 - he got few #1 coins, and when he know i have got  1 , comes to me with a 25$ + shgipping  proposition ( wich i polite decline )

- he start to be agressive and menacing to left a negative trust . ( what he did : check my trust ranking)

- indeed my reaction was to tell him: " dont do this , that's not fair..and you will loose your credibility."..)

- precisions: few times before this, as i know lauda was a "friend" of VOD , an user who left me a neg ranking in the past for absolutely no valid reason,  i have ask to Lauda:
 " could you please try to contact VOD please, for i can try to solve this OLD story with him , as i cant contact him directly since he has block my PM's ?"

his answer was: " why should i help you... ? "  ( wich motivate in party the fact to dont sold him this genesis coin at his ridiculous offfer )


Then,   i have finaly put this coin in auction few days ago , and this auction has ended yesterday ( LINK: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1544950.msg15528872#msg15528872


the reaction to this is know well know......   he left me a bad feedback , not using the genesis coin excuse, but in getting an OLD story i 've got in the past , and about he was well informed  many many time before he left his shit on my trust ranking ..  ( as explain above , we have even talk about it days and days before.... lol )


here's now some irc publics logs where you follow the story step by step :









i will edit my post with few other links quicly..


so in conclusion :  do you really think this guy is "credible " ?  for me the answer is clearly NO.
is just a teenager who abusing of his position

[cryptodevil]

LOL at the sudden resurgence of self-escrowing account-seller posts and their sock-puppets (gorgon666). It is almost as if they are the same person chasing the same shadows in their impotent rage.

Here is story:

I done a trade with a user "X" and after trade was complete this account"X" was sold to other user (can't reveal username because this account is now owned by a new owner who has nothing to do with this stuff so I don't want to involve him in this)
I had some problem with trade so I sent him many PMs and after he never replied left him a neg feedback but later he replied to me that he is new owner of this account and it was sold to him by user "Kanapka" using Defcon23 as escrow.


Cool

I sent message to user "Kanapka" for problem regarding my trade and this user responded me that he never sold me anything , and he bought this account from someone using Defcon23 as escrow, and asked me that I can confirm this from Defcon23
"here is screenshot of feedback left by Defcon23 on Kanapka trust page saying that this account(Kanapka) was sold using his escrow service"
https://i.imgur.com/DFebY2i.png

Ok, then I sent message to Defcon23 asking for this and he said Kanapka account was sold using his escrow when I asked when it was sold then he said it was sold after he did any trade with me(When I asked for date when the account was sold he refused).Then I asked him for some proofs that the account was sold so I know that it is not the original user who done trade with me and he didn't answered and started making fake excuses like"its my son's birthday and I am busy"


then I checked forum security log and found that password of account "Kanapka" was not changed since last 1 month? (my trade was 9-10 sepetember)
so it means that Defcon23 lied about this and account Kanapka was never sold using his escrow, this prove that "Kanapka" is his alt account and he is defending it using hero account Defcon23


also he left positive feedback to Kanapka for this transaction and also took fees from buyer for the trade between buyer and "Kanapka"(his potential alt)
that is against forum rules.

Here are Proofs where he said that the account was sold

trust page of kanapka => https://i.imgur.com/DFebY2i.png


Pms from defcon23 =>

helo

yes i have escrowed the sale of this account recently... nothing more to say. ( as you can read in the + 1 i let him , after this sale.)


regards.

tl'dr: 'defcon23' is a proven self-escrowing account-trader. Which, in light of this, makes their question below laughable:

so in conclusion :  do you really think this guy is "credible " ?  

[defcon23]

LOL at the sudden resurgence of self-escrowing account-seller posts and their sock-puppets (gorgon666). It is almost as if they are the same person chasing the same shadows in their impotent rage.

Here is story:

I done a trade with a user "X" and after trade was complete this account"X" was sold to other user (can't reveal username because this account is now owned by a new owner who has nothing to do with this stuff so I don't want to involve him in this)
I had some problem with trade so I sent him many PMs and after he never replied left him a neg feedback but later he replied to me that he is new owner of this account and it was sold to him by user "Kanapka" using Defcon23 as escrow.


Cool

I sent message to user "Kanapka" for problem regarding my trade and this user responded me that he never sold me anything , and he bought this account from someone using Defcon23 as escrow, and asked me that I can confirm this from Defcon23
"here is screenshot of feedback left by Defcon23 on Kanapka trust page saying that this account(Kanapka) was sold using his escrow service"
https://i.imgur.com/DFebY2i.png

Ok, then I sent message to Defcon23 asking for this and he said Kanapka account was sold using his escrow when I asked when it was sold then he said it was sold after he did any trade with me(When I asked for date when the account was sold he refused).Then I asked him for some proofs that the account was sold so I know that it is not the original user who done trade with me and he didn't answered and started making fake excuses like"its my son's birthday and I am busy"


then I checked forum security log and found that password of account "Kanapka" was not changed since last 1 month? (my trade was 9-10 sepetember)
so it means that Defcon23 lied about this and account Kanapka was never sold using his escrow, this prove that "Kanapka" is his alt account and he is defending it using hero account Defcon23


also he left positive feedback to Kanapka for this transaction and also took fees from buyer for the trade between buyer and "Kanapka"(his potential alt)
that is against forum rules.

Here are Proofs where he said that the account was sold

trust page of kanapka => https://i.imgur.com/DFebY2i.png


Pms from defcon23 =>

helo

yes i have escrowed the sale of this account recently... nothing more to say. ( as you can read in the + 1 i let him , after this sale.)


regards.

tl'dr: 'defcon23' is a proven self-escrowing account-trader. Which, in light of this, makes their question below laughable:

so in conclusion :  do you really think this guy is "credible " ?  

man you're an alt of neotox , then go home with your fake accusations

[cryptodevil]

man you're an alt of neotox , then go home with your fake accusations

I am? Dammit, why did no-one tell me until now?!

Awesome rebuttal of his, I mean 'my', evidence, btw, truly stellar comeback!

[defcon23]

neotox , why resorting this  shit today ?  go home ! ----------->  Quote from: Neotox on September 19, 2015, 05:11:02 PM

[Lauda]

LOL at the sudden resurgence of self-escrowing account-seller posts and their sock-puppets (gorgon666). It is almost as if they are the same person chasing the same shadows in their impotent rage.

The random chatlogs of no importance aren't properly stamped, as there is no dd/mm. Those interactions happened quite some time ago. Anyhow, I've yet to see a single argument that has any relevance to moderation. Just Bitcointalk drama; the next account is lurking behind the corner.

I am? Dammit, why did no-one tell me until now?!

I knew it all along!

[defcon23]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:




and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

[miffman]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:

https://i.imgur.com/luOXJ8l.png


and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

https://i.imgur.com/QWrA64c.png

Posting private chat logs is not cool. There are other ways to deal with issues.

[cryptodevil]

the problem about VOD feedback

The problem with VOD's feedback? It references a thread where evidence was presented which proved you were 'pulling a QS' and self-escrowing your own alt's trades.

Where is the 'problem', other than the fact it rightly causes people to think twice about wanting to trade with you?

[defcon23]

the problem about VOD feedback

The problem with VOD's feedback? It references a thread where evidence was presented which proved you were 'pulling a QS' and self-escrowing your own alt's trades.

Where is the 'problem', other than the fact it rightly causes people to think twice about wanting to trade with you?

wrong : thre's no evidence ;. indeed , as it's fake :: where are your evidences ? lol

go back home neotox.. you're off topic .. ( and by the way: welcome to my ignore list ..)

[defcon23]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:

https://i.imgur.com/luOXJ8l.png


and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

https://i.imgur.com/QWrA64c.png

Posting private chat logs is not cool. There are other ways to deal with issues.

and you think what Lauda's have done is cool ... ?  come back to reality dude

and trust me ... that's cool in comparaison to the following .....



.

[Lutpin]

Regardless of what is going on between the two of you (I don't want to comment on it, I don't want to take sides, please keep me out of it),
does this really have anything to do with Lauda being a Mod and their abilities to moderate the sections under them?

If you want to discuss this situation, why not take it to a Reputation thread about Lauda?
I haven't seen any strong arguments about Laudas ability to be a mod or the lack therof in some sites now.

[defcon23]

Regardless of what is going on between the two of you (I don't want to comment on it, I don't want to take sides, please keep me out of it),
does this really have anything to do with Lauda being a Mod and their abilities to moderate the sections under them?

If you want to discuss this situation, why not take it to a Reputation thread about Lauda?
I haven't seen any strong arguments about Laudas ability to be a mod or the lack therof in some sites now.

Lutpin : i think a moderator" should have a little something "more.." ,  and dont try to abuse of his position ... that's all ...   in this case,  the fact of i havent xant to trade with him for this specific coin  ( genesis #1 antique brass) , never should affect his judgement,  or motive i any way the bad ranking he left me for a one year old issue... )

as you can read it by yourself, we has talk about it , and this not had motived any bad ranking...
the reaction comes after i refused to sold him this shit coin, and by the way decided to auction it...




link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1544950.msg15536515#msg15536515

as you have said by yourself,: "Lauda's going to hate you .." , and you was perfectly right...


a real moderator never menaced to left a bad feedback  only for this fact ... this is not fair.

other precision:

the "these fakes" accusations against me are for an account sale .... ( 1 account ) do you syncerly think , as i've got tons of trades for so many bitcoins , with so many users, in so many deals, i will risk my btctalk reputation for only few cents ? ( escrow fees for 1 account sale ? ) ..... i let you think to this ..

[Lutpin]

I told you I didn't want to comment on the matter between you and Lauda. Please don't pull me into the middle of fights where I have no stake in whatsoever, I'm already having my fair share of them as it is.
My concern was simply about where this discussion should take place, not how and what's being discussed.

[Quickseller]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:

https://i.imgur.com/luOXJ8l.png


and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

https://i.imgur.com/QWrA64c.png

Posting private chat logs is not cool. There are other ways to deal with issues.

I don't see any indication that the messages posted were GPG encrypted so I don't see any reason why anyone would expect those messages to stay private. There should not be any expectation that a Personal message/direct message be kept private if they are not encrypted, especially if there is no explicit request to maintain confidentiality (a privnote sent in plaintext might be an exception to this, however it is still possible that someone will intercept this).  

@Lauda- are the screenshots of those messages an accurate representation of what you said to defcon23 at one point? If not then what is inaccurate?

I don't think that cryptodevil is an alt of neotux, and making this claim will only be a distraction.

[tspacepilot]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:

https://i.imgur.com/luOXJ8l.png


and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

https://i.imgur.com/QWrA64c.png

Posting private chat logs is not cool. There are other ways to deal with issues.

I don't see any indication that the messages posted were GPG encrypted so I don't see any reason why anyone would expect those messages to stay private. There should not be any expectation that a Personal message/direct message be kept private if they are not encrypted, especially if there is no explicit request to maintain confidentiality (a privnote sent in plaintext might be an exception to this, however it is still possible that someone will intercept this).  

@Lauda- are the screenshots of those messages an accurate representation of what you said to defcon23 at one point? If not then what is inaccurate?

I don't think that cryptodevil is an alt of neotux, and making this claim will only be a distraction.

I like how quickseller thinks that people PGP encrypt PMs on IRC

If you're having a private discussion with someone and you then later publish that discussion then it's certainly an aggressive act.  It's also not clear that these screenshots aren't simply faked.  Anyone can use any username on IRC and it's really not hard to do a little image editing anyway.  In any case, it's not clear to me what defcon is accusing him of.  If the screenshots are real then it looks like Lauda wanted to buy some item or another and was feeling impatient, then it looks like he refused to get involved in a personal dispute between Vod and defcon.  what's the accusation here?

[defcon23]

and here's the contains of  PM with Lauda:

https://i.imgur.com/luOXJ8l.png


and here, the proof he well know the problem about VOD feedback before his recent bad feedback ..
as we  have talking about before the genesis #1 "issue"...
so he have used this to trying discredit me ...

https://i.imgur.com/QWrA64c.png

Posting private chat logs is not cool. There are other ways to deal with issues.

I don't see any indication that the messages posted were GPG encrypted so I don't see any reason why anyone would expect those messages to stay private. There should not be any expectation that a Personal message/direct message be kept private if they are not encrypted, especially if there is no explicit request to maintain confidentiality (a privnote sent in plaintext might be an exception to this, however it is still possible that someone will intercept this).  

@Lauda- are the screenshots of those messages an accurate representation of what you said to defcon23 at one point? If not then what is inaccurate?

I don't think that cryptodevil is an alt of neotux, and making this claim will only be a distraction.

I like how quickseller thinks that people PGP encrypt PMs on IRC

If you're having a private discussion with someone and you then later publish that discussion then it's certainly an aggressive act.  It's also not clear that these screenshots aren't simply faked.  Anyone can use any username on IRC and it's really not hard to do a little image editing anyway.  In any case, it's not clear to me what defcon is accusing him of.  If the screenshots are real then it looks like Lauda wanted to buy some item or another and was feeling impatient, then it looks like he refused to get involved in a personal dispute between Vod and defcon.  what's the accusation here?

yeah sure.... but as you can see in this logs ( at least the publics ones)... many other users have seen the same shit..... that's how this is easely verifiable..

and yes.... that's not cool ....but just  not more than what Lauda have done in this case...

[tspacepilot]

and yes.... that's not cool ....but just  not more than what Lauda have done in this case...

And what was that exactly?  He was impatient about buying something from you?  He refused to get involved in some dispute between you and Vod?  I don't understand.