OgNasty: "@Lutpin: Really should kill himself."

[TwitchySeal]

-snip-

You're right, there were threats.  I just meant the subject isn't a threat and, in my opinion not even that big of a deal compared to blatant lies.

OgNasty bitched and moaned? (Guess i missed that part) ?  Or are you saying that because you have a grudge against him ?

It's hard not to have a grudge against someone who goes out of their way to treat you like shit and spread lies as if they were confirmed facts - and then simply ignore all attempts to defend myself.

Even with grudge and all...pretty sure he's bitching and moaning here though. (and also completely wrong)

Code:

<Slck><ognasty> I'm tired of the harassment.
<Slck><ognasty> Every day a new alt...  I'm done with it.
<Slck><ognasty> All because he's mad I'm getting paid for my signature...
<Slck><ognasty> No amount of harassment will change it, yet he won't stop.
<Slck><ognasty> I'm not going to put up with another two weeks of this.
<Anduck>shutdown the computer = no more harassing
<Slck><ognasty> Shutting down the computer doesn't stop them from making threads and leaving BS trust posts.
<Anduck>WoT is there for a reason
<Slck><ognasty> WoT is useless...
<Anduck>so your WoT/account is worth more than lutpin life?
<Anduck>good to know
<Slck><ognasty> Same bullshit alt games there too.... Mircea Popescu has like 25 different WoT alts.... lol
<Anduck>name them
<Slck><ognasty> No, I think people who harass others should kill themselves.
<Slck><ognasty> Lutpin is being a piece of shit for some reason...
<Slck><ognasty> If someone was harassing you repeatedly, I wouldn't stick up for them...
<Slck><miffman> Og, you can obviously say whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want. Do keep in mind that this is a public forum though. Anything that gets said here is pretty much here forever.
<Slck><ognasty> Dude is out of line.  You can try and blame the victim all you want.  I'm not going to silence myself merely because other people hide their comments behind alt accounts.
<Slck><ognasty> This is me saying I don't need an alt account to voice my opinion, and these people like Lutpin who anonymously attack people to try and get their way are the scum of the internet.
<Slck><ognasty> Not to mention they have no balls.
<Anduck>or maybe you're currently harassing lutpin publicly while some anonymous, as you said, is harassing you
<Slck><ognasty> or maybe I actually know what I'm talking about...
<hybridsole>guys, this isn't #bitcointalk-drama
<Slck><ognasty> I know it's always easier to assume people are stupid, but that is not the case here...
<hybridsole>please take your signature campaign stuff out of here
<Anduck>still you claim this anonymous = lutpin. are you sure of this Og?
<Anduck>*sure*
<Slck><ognasty> This is about me being harassed by a member of this chat.  Has nothing to do with my signature.  My signature is my own business.
<Slck><ognasty> I thought this was a community of intelligent individuals who wouldn't stand for this type of behavior, but obviously I was wrong.
<hybridsole>OGnasty, while that may be the case, I don't see anyone being harassed except for Lutpin right now.  And don't confuse that with me having a dog in this fight, I don't
<Slck><ognasty> Encourage extortion and stick up for people who harass others.  I'm sure that will lead to a better online community.
<Anduck>ognasty: what i've seen here is a death will against a community member here, and this community member is not you
<hybridsole>But telling someone to kill themselves isn't going to win you any sympathy points with me.
<Slck><ognasty> That's because while I'm being harassed privately, I'm responding publicy, because I do not need to hide.
<Anduck>there's simply no evidence of that lutpin is harrassing you, or is there?
<Slck><ognasty> Yes.
<Anduck>this is not about our intelligence or anything like that.
<Slck><ognasty> I have proof.
<Anduck>ok, prove it then?
<Anduck>why didn't you prove it earlier!
<Anduck>no need for guessing games when you can simply prove it.
<Slck><ognasty> I don't need to prove it to you.  I need to prove it to those wielding a ban hammer.  They're looking into my submission.
<Anduck>i am wielding a ban hammer here!
<Slck><minifrij> Anduck has control of this channel IIRC, he can ban people here
<Anduck>but, as you said Ognasty you don't need to prove me anything.
<Slck><ognasty> Indeed.
<Slck><ognasty> My reputation speaks for itself.  Lutpin's of him.
<hybridsole>proof or not, it's off-topic here. Maybe if someone scammed you for a Casascius coin, you can drag it out here. But the fact that the person you are beefing with is in this channel doesn't make it "on topic"
<Slck><ognasty> I'm voicing that I'm being harassed.  If you all want to look the other way, that is fine.
<Anduck>it's just a bit weird you ask for our help to remove Lutpin and simultaneously refuse to help with this
<Slck><ognasty> You're right.  His reputation is worthless and banning him from here or btctalk won't stop the harassment, as he's using TOR.
<Slck><ognasty> Best case scenario he's out a few satoshi's for a new account and has to wait before joining a new signature campaign.
<Anduck>but, why don't you want everyone to "know the truth"?
<Slck><ognasty> I guess I just expected that after 5 years of doing nothing but going out of my way to help nearly every active trader on bitcointalk, people can blame me as I'm being harassed repeatedly.
<Anduck>look, i'd be happy to help but so far you've refused all my attempts.
<Slck><ognasty> The truth is I'm being harassed as a result of Lutpin's displeasure at my signature advertiser.  You can believe, or not.  It makes no difference to me other than having to defend myself to you also.

[1713993719]

1713993719

[1713993719]

1713993719

[1713993719]

1713993719

[1713993719]

1713993719

[1713993719]

1713993719

[oksana28]

So the war is over now,i am sure lutpin added his feedback to ognasty, but I will wait to see what admin says.

[FruitsBasket]

It looks like everyone is getting butthurt, it is so weird to see DT members act as 8 year old kids.
Just both remove the feedback, I am sure those 'I hope Lutpin will kill himself' isn't really meant as u guys think. OgNasty is just tired of being accused for promoting a scam, I am not saying it was Lutpin.

Both quit your childish behaviour and get over it.

[criptix]

It looks like everyone is getting butthurt, it is so weird to see DT members act as 8 year old kids.
Just both remove the feedback, I am sure those 'I hope Lutpin will kill himself' isn't really meant as u guys think. OgNasty is just tired of being accused for promoting a scam, I am not saying it was Lutpin.

Both quit your childish behaviour and get over it.

Should just remove the trust system and make a database of trades.
Users can then check for them self if someone is trustworthy or not.
The trust system right now with account farmers/buyers/sellers and trust farming/trading/buying/selling just doesn't do anything anymore.
It is pretty much worthless.

[FruitsBasket]

It looks like everyone is getting butthurt, it is so weird to see DT members act as 8 year old kids.
Just both remove the feedback, I am sure those 'I hope Lutpin will kill himself' isn't really meant as u guys think. OgNasty is just tired of being accused for promoting a scam, I am not saying it was Lutpin.

Both quit your childish behaviour and get over it.

Should just remove the trust system and make a database of trades.
Users can then check for them self if someone is trustworthy or not.
The trust system right now with account farmers/buyers/sellers and trust farming/trading/buying/selling just doesn't do anything anymore.
It is pretty much worthless.

It has no point, the whole trust system is shit.
Even the DT people can not behave, so u can come up with the best system, but yes there are always people breaking it. Every system/concept has it pros and cons. The trust system is just too easy to abuse for DT members and neutral trusted can't do anything about it since DT members (mostly) back each other.

In this case there is a war between DT, this is new to me.

[criptix]

It looks like everyone is getting butthurt, it is so weird to see DT members act as 8 year old kids.
Just both remove the feedback, I am sure those 'I hope Lutpin will kill himself' isn't really meant as u guys think. OgNasty is just tired of being accused for promoting a scam, I am not saying it was Lutpin.

Both quit your childish behaviour and get over it.

Should just remove the trust system and make a database of trades.
Users can then check for them self if someone is trustworthy or not.
The trust system right now with account farmers/buyers/sellers and trust farming/trading/buying/selling just doesn't do anything anymore.
It is pretty much worthless.

It has no point, the whole trust system is shit.
Even the DT people can not behave, so u can come up with the best system, but yes there are always people breaking it. Every system/concept has it pros and cons. The trust system is just too easy to abuse for DT members and neutral trusted can't do anything about it since DT members (mostly) back each other.

In this case there is a war between DT, this is new to me.

It happened more then once and additionally there were also cases of DT members scamming thousands of btc in the past - some of them still active on this forum.

[FruitsBasket]

It looks like everyone is getting butthurt, it is so weird to see DT members act as 8 year old kids.
Just both remove the feedback, I am sure those 'I hope Lutpin will kill himself' isn't really meant as u guys think. OgNasty is just tired of being accused for promoting a scam, I am not saying it was Lutpin.

Both quit your childish behaviour and get over it.

Should just remove the trust system and make a database of trades.
Users can then check for them self if someone is trustworthy or not.
The trust system right now with account farmers/buyers/sellers and trust farming/trading/buying/selling just doesn't do anything anymore.
It is pretty much worthless.

It has no point, the whole trust system is shit.
Even the DT people can not behave, so u can come up with the best system, but yes there are always people breaking it. Every system/concept has it pros and cons. The trust system is just too easy to abuse for DT members and neutral trusted can't do anything about it since DT members (mostly) back each other.

In this case there is a war between DT, this is new to me.

It happened more the once and also there were cases of DT members scamming thousands of btc in the past.

Actually you know what, you are right.
People can not be trusted, they want to get as much money as possible and can not be satisfied with the amount they have. This ruins the whole site, I have been scammed a few times. And of course it pissed me off alot. To stay on topic, scew the trust system it is worthless. If DT people behave so childish that says something about what they are worth.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

<snip>To stay on topic, scew the trust system it is worthless. If DT people behave so childish that says something about what they are worth.

I tend to agree with you.  When someone you don't know who doesn't agree with your opinion on something can redden your trust page, the trust system is pretty damn broken.  And I know that's exactly how some of the people I've left negative trust for feel.  And that's my opinion, and I can't think of really anything better unless there was something like what Ebay has, based on marketplace or currency exchange deals.

I've come to believe that the DT system is just wacky, and I took that off my trust settings.  I've given a lot of people negs for the deplorable practice of account sales, but I've not given a lot of positives.  There are people I would trust on this forum, but not many, and I don't know anything about many of the DT members.  I don't do a lot of deals on this forum anyway, so it's kind of moot.

[Blazed]

<snip>To stay on topic, scew the trust system it is worthless. If DT people behave so childish that says something about what they are worth.

I tend to agree with you.  When someone you don't know who doesn't agree with your opinion on something can redden your trust page, the trust system is pretty damn broken.  And I know that's exactly how some of the people I've left negative trust for feel.  And that's my opinion, and I can't think of really anything better unless there was something like what Ebay has, based on marketplace or currency exchange deals.

I've come to believe that the DT system is just wacky, and I took that off my trust settings.  I've given a lot of people negs for the deplorable practice of account sales, but I've not given a lot of positives.  There are people I would trust on this forum, but not many, and I don't know anything about many of the DT members.  I don't do a lot of deals on this forum anyway, so it's kind of moot.

The DT system does have issues, but no one has yet to come up with a better system. For the most part, it works fine for helping newbies steer clear of scams. The whole point is after you have been here a while you create your own trust network and go from there. If you can think of something better than by all means post it. Anyways to get on topic: It looks like the feud is over and they should just go their separate ways. I do not think the single negative feedback hurts either of them and this topic should just get locked and forgotten.

[OgNasty]

I don't think the default trust system has issues.  The only problem is that some users in default trust hand out trust like candy to anyone who has any interaction with them to inflate their ratings, even if there is no trust involved on their end.  There are also users who give trust to proven liars so long as it lines up with their agendas.  I suspect given enough time, the bad eggs will eventually find their way out of the system.  Until then, all you need to do is review someone's feedback.  It's pretty easy to see who you are able to trust.  Lutpin hasn't responded to any of my messages since making this thread to discuss the situation, so it appears he is happy with the result.  I would say I wonder why he hasn't locked the thread, but hey, we all know why, as this was just another baseless attempt to try and hurt my reputation.

[Dinki]

Lutpin said his health is being affected and Og threatened to make public his residential address. I think this has gone beyond Og being bitchy, what if OG decides to pay Lutpin a visit along with some of his friends?

Things could get really nasty here.

[TwitchySeal]

I don't think the default trust system has issues. The only problem is that some users in default trust hand out trust like candy to anyone who has any interaction with them to inflate their ratings, even if there is no trust involved on their end.  There are also users who give trust to proven liars so long as it lines up with their agendas.  I suspect given enough time, the bad eggs will eventually find their way out of the system.  Until then, all you need to do is review someone's feedback.  It's pretty easy to see who you are able to trust.

I agree with OgNastys view that it's wrong to leave positive trust to anyone if the only thing considered is your own reputation.

All of these scenarios are wrong.

A)Handing out green trust only to improve your own reputation.
B)Not handing out red trust only to improve your own reputation.
C)Not handing out green trust only to improve your own reputation.
D)Handing out red trust only to improve your own reputation.
E)Handing out neutral trust only to improve your own reputation.
F)Not handing out neutral trust only to improve your own reputation.

It shouldn't matter what type of trust we're talking about, or if it's the decision to leave it or not, if the only motivation is your own feedback - it's wrong.

Until this whole issue involving OgNasty and his signature unfolded a month ago, he had been a member here for over 5 years without leaving or receiving a single negative feedback of any kind.  His reaction to GamesProtect's negative feedback and behavior since then has revealed that OgNasty has probably been going out of his way for a long time to maintain his non-untrusted reputation.

Negative feedback should be a way for users to help inform others of potential risks.  There is nothing to gain directly by leaving negative feedback.  So OgNasty uses it only to convince others not to mess with him and when that doesn't work they contribute to the level of his hissy fit.

Lutpin hasn't responded to any of my messages since making this thread to discuss the situation, so it appears he is happy with the result. 

You haven't responded to any of my request's for an explanation on why you are telling people I tried to extort you, why you are saying the pms I posted are edited and out of context (here they are with screenshots if anyone's hasn't read them), why you are telling people I AM games direct or support their services.

Should I assume you're just an incredibly stubborn shithead with an ego that's preventing your conscience from doing the right thing?

I would say I wonder why he hasn't locked the thread

I would say that it seems like you really want this read locked.

, but hey, we all know why, as this was just another baseless attempt to try and hurt my reputation.

No, this was an attempt to get you to stop making baseless accusations and lies.  Oh look, you just made another one. 

[CryptoDatabase]

I don't think the default trust system has issues. The only problem is that some users in default trust hand out trust like candy to anyone who has any interaction with them to inflate their ratings, even if there is no trust involved on their end.  There are also users who give trust to proven liars so long as it lines up with their agendas.  I suspect given enough time, the bad eggs will eventually find their way out of the system.  Until then, all you need to do is review someone's feedback.  It's pretty easy to see who you are able to trust.

I agree with OgNastys view that it's wrong to leave positive trust to anyone if the only thing considered is your own reputation.

All of these scenarios are wrong.

A)Handing out green trust only to improve your own reputation.
B)Not handing out red trust only to improve your own reputation.
C)Not handing out green trust only to improve your own reputation.
D)Handing out red trust only to improve your own reputation.
E)Handing out neutral trust only to improve your own reputation.
F)Not handing out neutral trust only to improve your own reputation.

It shouldn't matter what type of trust we're talking about, or if it's the decision to leave it or not, if the only motivation is your own feedback - it's wrong.

Until this whole issue involving OgNasty and his signature unfolded a month ago, he had been a member here for over 5 years without leaving or receiving a single negative feedback of any kind.  His reaction to GamesProtect's negative feedback and behavior since then has revealed that OgNasty has probably been going out of his way for a long time to maintain his non-untrusted reputation.

Negative feedback should be a way for users to help inform others of potential risks.  There is nothing to gain directly by leaving negative feedback.  So OgNasty uses it only to convince others not to mess with him and when that doesn't work they contribute to the level of his hissy fit.

Lutpin hasn't responded to any of my messages since making this thread to discuss the situation, so it appears he is happy with the result.  

You haven't responded to any of my request's for an explanation on why you are telling people I tried to extort you, why you are saying the pms I posted are edited and out of context (here they are with screenshots if anyone's hasn't read them), why you are telling people I AM games direct or support their services.

Should I assume you're just an incredibly stubborn shithead with an ego that's preventing your conscience from doing the right thing?

I would say I wonder why he hasn't locked the thread

I would say that it seems like you really want this read locked.

, but hey, we all know why, as this was just another baseless attempt to try and hurt my reputation.

No, this was an attempt to get you to stop making baseless accusations and lies.  Oh look, you just made another one.  

Seems that whenever he gets negative feedback his direct and immediate reaction is to threaten them to get the feedback removed and judging from his track record of no red feedback I'd say it used to be effective.

That is until folks got tired of his shit and didn't comply with his demands and now here we are.

[TwitchySeal]

Seems that whenever he gets negative feedback his direct and immediate reaction is to threaten them to get the feedback removed and judging from his track record of no red feedback I'd say it used to be effective.

That is until folks got tired of his shit and didn't comply with his demands and now here we are.

Almost as if...

I suspect given enough time, the bad eggs will eventually find their way out of the system.

[game-protect]

I had a conversation with RHavar in my thread. His last statement was July 25, 2016:

https://bitcointalk.or/index.php?topic=1535816.msg15708241#msg15708241

August 13, 2016 RHavar suddenly gave me the following negative feedback:

This user provides a service which appears to be nothing but a scammy attempt to collect referrals and/or a yearly fee. The site is set up anonymously and does nothing to demonstrate it provides the promised services. Their "partners" are a misleading term to mean casinos that they signed up for as an affiliate.

Feedback reference is his old post in my thread from July 18, 2016

RHavar admits here in this thread that he was contacted by OgNasty August 13, 2016 and asked to remove the positive feedback he gave to TwitchySeal few months ago:

I don't like drama, but I do feel compelled to weigh in.


A while ago (2016-05-19) , I left TwitchySeal some positive feedback:

One of the sane ones. An asset to the bitcoin gambling community

I honestly forgot why, but it was probably to do with one of his posts around that time.

Anyway, recently I get a PM from OgNasty telling me I should remove my feedback because TwitchySeal is an extortionist. When I asked him for some more information, he basically refused and pressed on with what is arguably thinly veiled extortion of his own:

"Stupid extortion plan"
Here you go: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1582065.0

I'm missing the bit with extortion?

I don't share PMs, as I consider that a breach of trust.  However, they indeed did present me with an ultimatum that I consider an extortion attempt.  Either way, let me know if you don't want to remove the trust rating and I'll just remove my trust of Mitchell so that I can get him out of my trust network that way.  No hard feelings against you either way.  I just figured asking you would be better than disconnecting myself with Mitchell, who I did think was trustworthy.  Not any kind of problem though.  Good luck with you in the future.  Always nice to speak with another Bitcoin enthusiast.

I never left him negative feedback, as his trade and escrow history gives me the impression he is otherwise an honest guy. But I do take issue with the way he attempted to strong arm me into removing my feedback.

And August 13, 2016 is exactly the day when RHavar suddenly decided to give me a negative feedback, with reference to his old post in my thread from July 18, 2016

-> a blind with a crooked stick can see who gave RHavar the order to give me a negative feedback!

[Vod]

Should just remove the trust system and make a database of trades.
Users can then check for them self if someone is trustworthy or not.

Really?  Scammers like Quickseller have dozens of alt accounts.  They would all be leaving fake trade info and soon would become the most "trusted" people on here.

The current system is a lot better than a simple database.

[satmas]

We could always require proof of the trade actually has been done(via a video of the chat or teamviewer) but then again, there's a problem about the alts just making a fake chat...(or the person using the teamviewer might be scammers themselves). At least that'll somewhat stop the flood of "trading info" from alts.

[RHavar]

RHavar admits here in this thread that he was contacted by OgNasty August 13, 2016 and asked to remove the positive feedback he gave to TwitchySeal few months ago:

[snip]

And August 13, 2016 is exactly the day when RHavar suddenly decided to give me a negative feedback, with reference to his old post in my thread from July 18, 2016

-> a blind with a crooked stick can see who gave RHavar the order to give me a negative feedback!

Just to be clear, OgNasty (or anyone for that matter) has never asked, hinted or ordered me to give negative feedback to you. I did it because I believed and still believe what I wrote in my feedback. But lets not derail the thread here, feel free to PM me about it or post on your thread.

[suchmoon]

We could always require proof of the trade actually has been done(via a video of the chat or teamviewer) but then again, there's a problem about the alts just making a fake chat...(or the person using the teamviewer might be scammers themselves). At least that'll somewhat stop the flood of "trading info" from alts.

How about we start requiring selfies with IDs?

Get real, this would only make it easier for scammers that can fake just about anything, whereas legitimate traders won't do it.

[satmas]

We could always require proof of the trade actually has been done(via a video of the chat or teamviewer) but then again, there's a problem about the alts just making a fake chat...(or the person using the teamviewer might be scammers themselves). At least that'll somewhat stop the flood of "trading info" from alts.

How about we start requiring selfies with IDs?

Get real, this would only make it easier for scammers that can fake just about anything, whereas legitimate traders won't do it.

You have a point.