Lauda/TMAN extortion attempt

[sbogovac]

Your logic is flawed [...]

Right, but that still makes the thing that you did wrong.

I did?!? What are you talking about??? What did I do...  

[1713585624]

1713585624

[1713585624]

1713585624

[1713585624]

1713585624

[anonymoustroll420]

I did?!? What are you talking about??? What did I do... 

Corrected the wording of my post

[sbogovac]

I did?!? What are you talking about??? What did I do... 

Corrected the wording of my post

Thank you. And yes, if things went down as - pretty much - described; it was pretty "wrong". But in Lauda's case it was "mistake" wrong (and he was punished [lost his staff status] for it) and not "evil" wrong (which should lead to a "guilty conscience"). There is a significant difference...

[ibminer]

The raw facts that QS posted seemed accurate but I just didn't have the same interpretations or draw the same conclusions.

No, they are most certainly not facts. Whilst I am not going to waste my time debunking the whole thread, especially not considering the time passed since the event, here's one example:

Immidiately prior to sending this 'extortion message' Lauda (and upon information and belief, others) was (were) badgering zeroaxl about his alleged criminal activity.

This is a blatant lie. If my memory serves me correctly, I had sent zero messages to Zeroxal prior to the 'string message' itself (at least not within that month; e.g. we had a trade a long time ago).

I don't really see the example you listed as a fact but more hearsay or opinion because I did not see anything solid to really back that particular statement up. I'm primarily referring to the links and archive information that had been posted as being the closest set of factual data that could be explored (I explored more than this, but that data was I guess what I would call my starting point), I certainly try to comprehend these opinions and take them into account but I don't normally accept them as fact unless I find or see adequate proof. Not that this statement would have altered my conclusions anyway...

As for wasting your time, IMO time itself should not make this go away or be any less relevant, the facts should do that. I realize I'm late on this thread, for various reasons, but felt the need to respond with an explanation of why I didn't feel right leaving a negative rating.

[vodaljepa]

Just a small bump to keep this at the top

[Timelord2067]

Archived for future reference: http://archive.is/QtagX#selection-2397.0-2419.41

Just a small bump to keep this at the top

Is bumping the thread an indication the person is QS?  Forget which alt you've logged in with eh?


*edit*

Their trust feedback speaks volumes:

[ibminer]

Archived for future reference: http://archive.is/QtagX#selection-2397.0-2419.41

Just a small bump to keep this at the top

That definitely proves you're an alt of the alt known as quickseller bumping their thread no less.  Forget which alt you've logged in with eh?

Do you have other proof of this or just this bump?

[anonymoustroll420]

Archived for future reference: http://archive.is/QtagX#selection-2397.0-2419.41

Just a small bump to keep this at the top

That definitely proves you're an alt of the alt known as quickseller bumping their thread no less.  Forget which alt you've logged in with eh?

I can't really remember who I'm an alt of. Put me down as a QS alt I suppose.

[vodaljepa]

A friendly bump to keep this near the top

[Timelord2067]

A friendly bump to keep this near the top

quickseller -499: -9 / +13 called me an idiot, so I pooed in my pants...

[Your Point Is Invalid]

Ridiculous how Lauda can make extortion attempts and not get negative trust for it, the trust system is being monopolized guys, the forum is going to shit

[vodaljepa]

Just here for a friendly bump

[Quickseller]

I want to publicly say that I strongly disagree with the removal of negative ratings against Lauda/TMAN.

In the case of Lauda, this is not the first time that he has been accused of extorting someone, and AFAICT, the claims that zeroaxl was evading taxes/engaging in illegal activity were baseless. What could be reasonably confirmed however was that zeroaxl has/had a large amount of BTC, and had the resources to pay an extortion payment in order to prevent an invasive police investigation.

The first "extortion attempt" didn't seem legitimate to me.

This thread is disturbing but I would have liked to see an actual transaction as more solid proof that Lauda wasn't just bluffing to bring a scammer out into the open. If it was a bluff for entrapment, it is not extortion, even though I don't agree with the behavior. For me it seems like speculation as to what would or could have happened and just having speculation doesn't make it easy marking a person negative for extortion who appears to put a good amount of time and effort into helping the community and people in general.

I agree with the Staff removal and would be fine leaving a negative feedback if I had better evidence of actual extortion but I don't see it.

Sorry for the severely delayed response.

It looks like you agreed that Lauda did in fact extort zeroaxl below, however I would point out that findlaw.com describes extortion as "[...]gaining of [...]money[...] by [...] threat of [...] harm to reputation, or 4) unfavorable government action[...]" and also "[...]threat to expose the details of someone's private lives to the public unless money is exchanged[...]"

I would say that it is clear that Lauda's and TMAN's action meet the above criteria.

In regards to this potentially being a "bluff for entrapment" I would strongly disagree that is the case. I would point out that paying an extortion payment is not an admission of guilt. For example, if Lauda were to tell you that you needed to send him 2 BTC or he will tell your wife that you recently cheated on her, the fact that you (hypothetically) paid this extortion payment does not necessarily mean that you recently cheated on your wife. I presume that most people would not want their significant other receiving this kind of message -- the chances of you paying might be higher if you had cheated on her many years ago that she found out about (possibly in a similar manor), but remain loyal since then, or if your wife has trust issues, or if you are having marital problems, but remain loyal to her.

I also remember a few years ago that Roger Ver posted a video of him receiving a skype call in which someone threatened to "SWAT" his mother if he did not sent 20 BTC to a specific address. I suspect that there was no reason for a SWAT team to visit Ver's mother's house, however Ver might have paid if he didn't want his mother getting 'swated' -- IIRC Ver actually ended up offering a 20 BTC bounty for the guy's arrest.

This is not a case of extortion strictly speaking, rather it is a case of attempted extortion, which is just as much of a crime, and is just as bad.

In regards to your comments about my motives, I would say that I have a history of not being friendly to extortionists. I would refer you to my public interactions regarding puzzle.me and and candystripes/thoughtful to see my long history of my strong negative opinions regarding attempted extortion.

[vodaljepa]

And what's mind boggling is that Lauda still has green trust, In fact it's safe to say they have alt accounts high up in the DT system
Don't forget Lauda was once a moderator in the Croatian section https://web.archive.org/web/20161231143757/https://bitcointalk.org/

[minifrij]

In fact it's safe to say they have alt accounts high up in the DT system

It's only safe to say such if you have evidence to back it up.

Don't forget Lauda was once a moderator in the Croatian section

They also moderated the Speculation section, which is why they were a Staff member. I don't understand what this has to do with anything however.

[vodaljepa]

In fact it's safe to say they have alt accounts high up in the DT system

It's only safe to say such if you have evidence to back it up.

Don't forget Lauda was once a moderator in the Croatian section

They also moderated the Speculation section, which is why they were a Staff member. I don't understand what this has to do with anything however.

You want to play stupid?
Lauda is Croatian I am 90% sure on this, you do not get modded for a countries section if you're not fluent in that language (Or even show any interest to mod a section if you didn't speak that language, Lauda showed interest in the Croatian section, I wonder why), by the way they typed and worded things I can tell 100% they are totally fluent in writing and speaking Croatian

Why are you always defending Lauda? in all topics I see
Are you an alt?

[sbogovac]

[...]

Don't forget Lauda was once a moderator in the Croatian section

They also moderated the Speculation section, which is why they were a Staff member. I don't understand what this has to do with anything however.

You want to play stupid?
Lauda is Croatian I am 90% sure on this, you do not get modded for a countries section if you're not fluent in that language (Or even show any interest to mod a section if you didn't speak that language, Lauda showed interest in the Croatian section, I wonder why), by the way they typed and worded things I can tell 100% they are totally fluent in writing and speaking Croatian

Why are you always defending Lauda? in all topics I see
Are you an alt?

I guess this is more of an "how is that (Lauda being Croatian, or not) relevant here (Lauda [...] extortion attempt)... 

[ibminer]

Sorry for the severely delayed response.

It looks like you agreed that Lauda did in fact extort zeroaxl below, however I would point out that findlaw.com describes extortion as "[...]gaining of [...]money[...] by [...] threat of [...] harm to reputation, or 4) unfavorable government action[...]" and also "[...]threat to expose the details of someone's private lives to the public unless money is exchanged[...]"

I would say that it is clear that Lauda's and TMAN's action meet the above criteria.

In regards to this potentially being a "bluff for entrapment" I would strongly disagree that is the case. I would point out that paying an extortion payment is not an admission of guilt. For example, if Lauda were to tell you that you needed to send him 2 BTC or he will tell your wife that you recently cheated on her, the fact that you (hypothetically) paid this extortion payment does not necessarily mean that you recently cheated on your wife. I presume that most people would not want their significant other receiving this kind of message -- the chances of you paying might be higher if you had cheated on her many years ago that she found out about (possibly in a similar manor), but remain loyal since then, or if your wife has trust issues, or if you are having marital problems, but remain loyal to her.

I also remember a few years ago that Roger Ver posted a video of him receiving a skype call in which someone threatened to "SWAT" his mother if he did not sent 20 BTC to a specific address. I suspect that there was no reason for a SWAT team to visit Ver's mother's house, however Ver might have paid if he didn't want his mother getting 'swated' -- IIRC Ver actually ended up offering a 20 BTC bounty for the guy's arrest.

This is not a case of extortion strictly speaking, rather it is a case of attempted extortion, which is just as much of a crime, and is just as bad.

In regards to your comments about my motives, I would say that I have a history of not being friendly to extortionists. I would refer you to my public interactions regarding puzzle.me and and candystripes/thoughtful to see my long history of my strong negative opinions regarding attempted extortion.

Before I fully respond to this, I have a question relating to motive. In this situation, should the good things that Lauda has done for the forum & community be a factor when determining reasonable doubt over whether or not this was an extortion attempt to bring someone supposedly shady out into the open -or- an extortion attempt for some sort of financial gain?  Again, I don't really agree with either, but the latter is much worse IMO.

Also, I'm not sure your example is very compelling for me. Personally, I would first tell Lauda I unfortunately don't own 2BTC - as sad as that is - so attempting to extort me is pointless as I couldn't send it anyway (donations are accepted! ). Even if I did have it, I'm too strong minded (or maybe hard headed?) that I would never pay anything for something I didn't do. There are other things I would do in this situation, but I'm not going to give away how I would defend myself. Besides, my wife trusts me and would certainly believe my word over some damn online cat!  

[minifrij]

Lauda is Croatian I am 90% sure on this, you do not get modded for a countries section if you're not fluent in that language (Or even show any interest to mod a section if you didn't speak that language, Lauda showed interest in the Croatian section, I wonder why), by the way they typed and worded things I can tell 100% they are totally fluent in writing and speaking Croatian

So, does this mean that anyone that speaks fluent English is from a predominantly English speaking country? Being fluent in a language - to any extent - isn't a reliable method of gauging where someone is from.

Regardless, as sbogovac said:

I guess this is more of an "how is that (Lauda being Croatian, or not) relevant here (Lauda [...] extortion attempt)...  

Why are you always defending Lauda? in all topics I see

Because I don't feel that they deserve all of the negative attention that they are receiving.

Are you an alt?

If you want me to be an alt, then nothing I could say or do would change your mind. For the record however, no.

[Quickseller]

Before I fully respond to this, I have a question relating to motive. In this situation, should the good things that Lauda has done for the forum & community be a factor when determining reasonable doubt over whether or not this was an extortion attempt to bring someone supposedly shady out into the open -or- an extortion attempt for some sort of financial gain?  Again, I don't really agree with either, but the latter is much worse IMO.

I'll be honest with you, I don't agree that Lauda has done very much to benefit the community. It is my opinion that Lauda has been trying to gain additional power, is power hungry, and is attempting profit personally from his power. I acknowledge that this does not help my case, but that is okay because it is the truth.

To answer your question more broadly, yes I would give someone who I believed to have helped the community in the past more of a benefit of the doubt. I also would be willing to argue a lesser "punishment" for this kind of person to a certain degree, although I would say that the punishment that Lauda has received is not appropriate for someone who has greatly helped the community (again, I don't think Lauda meets that criteria).  

I don't think the fact that Lauda sent a demand for payment from zeroaxl is in dispute. It is my understanding that it is not disputed that Lauda sent a message along the lines of "you need to send me BTC or else..." and this kind of message makes any benefit of the doubt given to be disregarded as this would meet the criteria of an extortion attempt.

I would also question how exactly Lauda's activity might have brought someone shady into the open. If my memory serves me correctly, zeroaxl had told me via PM that he was accused of a very wide range of shady behavior, from tax evasion to the hacking of bitfinex. I don't think this fact has been disputed, but I also don't think it has been out in the open in a way so that it could be disputed. I would say that if this is true, it would remove credibility that Lauda was trying to "bring light to shady behavior"  

Also, I'm not sure your example is very compelling for me. Personally, I would first tell Lauda I unfortunately don't own 2BTC - as sad as that is - so attempting to extort me is pointless as I couldn't send it anyway (donations are accepted! ). Even if I did have it, I'm too strong minded (or maybe hard headed?) that I would never pay anything for something I didn't do. There are other things I would do in this situation, but I'm not going to give away how I would defend myself. Besides, my wife trusts me and would certainly believe my word over some damn online cat!  

Well you are lucky to be in that kind of marriage/relationship with your wife. I think it is fair to acknowledge that not everyone benefits from your situation, and that a good number of people would be inclined to pay, even if they have done nothing wrong.

Maybe a better example would be Lauda showing you evidence that causes you to believe that he can cause an in-person IRS audit, and he demands $100 worth of BTC, or else he will cause you to get an in-person IRS audit. Even if you have filed/paid your taxes properly your whole life, the time spent taking off work, and the stress of an audit is probably worth more than $100. If I were to receive that kind of extortion demand, I would not pay, and if anyone asked me for my opinion, I would tell them not to pay, however I think that a lot of people would probably pay this kind of extortion demand (sadly). I guess my point is more that there are reasons why someone might pay an extortion payment even if they have done nothing morally wrong (let alone illegal).

edit: here is a quote from a PM that I received

They just brought up "shady" things of mine and never were able to prove that I apparently hacked bitfinex, ran serveral ponzies and even run a botnet, because I didn't do any of that. We decided to talk about it in private.
Feel free to bring anything up against lauda though, I honestly don't think he deserves the staff badge.