Lauda should have his ability to delete posts in Self Moderated thread removed

[Quickseller]

Lauda was recently exposed as being an extortionist that resulted in him being removed from him being staff.

Lauda however is still very heavily using self-moderated threads in order to censor those who are calling him out on failing to fulfill his escrow obligations, and asking for information about a scam that he was involved in.

This is not the first time that Lauda has censored those who are critical of him via the use of self moderated threads, however I now feel that the case for this is stronger to disallow Lauda from deleting posts in self moderated threads now that (a) he has been exposed as an extortionist and (b) that he was involved in a scam in which Lauda was acting as an escrow and some funds were lost.

I would like to request that Lauda be given a hidden scammer tag preventing him from deleting additional posts from self-moderated threads (and ideally from deleting posts and/or editing his posts).

Deleted post in question:

A reply of yours, quoted below, was deleted by the starter of a self-moderated topic. There are no rules of self-moderation, so this deletion cannot be appealed. Do not continue posting in this topic if the topic-starter has requested that you leave.

You can create a new topic if you are unsatisfied with this one. If the topic-starter is scamming, post about it in Scam Accusations.

Unfortunately, translators and people who were participating in other bounties will receive no compensation.

I am not quite sure why some creditors are being treated differently than others. That does not seem very fair to me.

ALSO, how about an apology from the Escrows?  (for royally fucking up)

Does anyone have any escrow agreement and/or link to any posts made by any of the escrows about representations of their role? I find it strange that any money was stolen if escrow was being used.

I also find it highly inappropriate for this kind of thread to be self moderated.  

As mentioned, here is evidence that Lauda had censored others who are critical of him in the past, and here is evidence that Lauda was previously involved in a scam via advertising for said scam.

[1714105535]

1714105535

[BitHodler]

It's actually very simple, if you have problems with your posts, or posts from others being removed by Lauda (or in general by anyone else) in self moderated threads, then you're free to create your own thread to discuss what needs to be discussed according to you.

If you already know that your posts will get deleted, then it's pointless to keep posting there and later to complain about it when you can simply have your own thread created. I am quite sure you know very well how things work here.

[Quickseller]

It's actually very simple, if you have problems with your posts, or posts from others being removed by Lauda (or in general by anyone else) in self moderated threads, then you're free to create your own thread to discuss what needs to be discussed according to you.

If you already know that your posts will get deleted, then it's pointless to keep posting there and later to complain about it when you can simply have your own thread created. I am quite sure you know very well how things work here.

Especially egregious scammers are not able to continue scamming others, especially after it has become abundantly clear that they are a scammer, which I believe to be the case with Lauda.   

Removing Lauda's ability to delete posts in self moderated threads will make it more difficult for him to hide/cover up evidence.

Many scammers use "Self Moderated thread" feature to scam people, spread FUD or simply troll others members, so i think it's not fair only to ask remove  Lauda's ability to delete posts in Self Moderated thread.
Maybe all scammers should be given hidden scammer tag and unable to make self-moderated thread as well.

This is generally only done for more extreme cases of scammers.

[FFrankie]

I don't think it is fair that you are assuming laudas gender identity. I feel like you could be more sensitive and use gender neturel pronouns

[Lauda]

Especially egregious scammers are not able to continue scamming others, especially after it has become abundantly clear that they are a scammer, which I believe to be the case with Lauda.  

Please, do enlighten me. Who exactly did I scam and how?

I don't think it is fair that you are assuming laudas gender identity. I feel like you could be more sensitive and use gender neturel pronouns

Someone understands it. Thank you.

[Hhampuz]

What does it say about you QS, if you would want certain people (People you have had problems with in the past) to have some of their rights to use this forum purged or removed?

Rather than this, why would you not just ask for Lauda to be banned? Or do you prefer oppression?

About Ascendancy. I took a small part in that project as I knew some people working on it (not the devs.. lol). From what I saw and what I understood from the people involved, this had nothing to do with the escrows. And all of the escrows, in particular lauda worked tirelessly to get back the stolen funds. Did you really do your due diligence on this one?

[Decoded]

This is absurd.

Lauda did a nice job moderating, and their actions of "extortion" did not end in anyone's coins being stolen. If anything, their position as moderator was not as much influenced by this than Theymos and his pals trying to distance themselves as far as possible.

What it looks like to me is that someone felt the need to complain that they, who also is accused of doing something wrong but didn't make anything or even affect anyone else, have been begged when Lauda, in a similar case, isn't really "feeling the heat".

How come we don't see all this drama with censorship on altcoins threads, Theymos' dox, Block stream, etc? Why all on Lauda? You're making a mountain of a molehill.

[BitHodler]

It's actually very simple, if you have problems with your posts, or posts from others being removed by Lauda (or in general by anyone else) in self moderated threads, then you're free to create your own thread to discuss what needs to be discussed according to you.

If you already know that your posts will get deleted, then it's pointless to keep posting there and later to complain about it when you can simply have your own thread created. I am quite sure you know very well how things work here.

Especially egregious scammers are not able to continue scamming others, especially after it has become abundantly clear that they are a scammer, which I believe to be the case with Lauda.   

Removing Lauda's ability to delete posts in self moderated threads will make it more difficult for him to hide/cover up evidence.

If your main focus is that scammers will need to have their ability of creating moderated threads taken away, then you should say that and not point your focus on Lauda as I have the impression that this is nothing more than a personal vendetta.

[whywefight]

Stop bitching QS, you doing exactly the same by deleting my posts when i keep asking you to remove my name here. So why dont you clean up dirt on your own frontdoor first?

[Vod]

Stop bitching QS, you doing exactly the same by deleting my posts when i keep asking you to remove my name here. So why dont you clean up dirt on your own frontdoor first?

Quickseller is the very definition of a hypocrite.  I can't count the number of times he has called out others for doing exactly what he does.

[Quickseller]

Especially egregious scammers are not able to continue scamming others, especially after it has become abundantly clear that they are a scammer, which I believe to be the case with Lauda.   

Please, do enlighten me. Who exactly did I scam and how?

1 - You attempted to extort both zeroaxl, and defcon23, and possibly others. You have admitted no wrongdoing when you were called out on attempting to extort these people, you have shown no remorse, all indicators of a sociopath.

2 - You have a list here, in which (at the top of the above post), you yourself admit that you were an escrow agent in a transaction that one party will end up loosing a cumulative ~2.2BTC, due to at best your gross negligence, or more realistically, due to your own malicious planning with the scammer.

What does it say about you QS, if you would want certain people (People you have had problems with in the past) to have some of their rights to use this forum purged or removed?

Rather than this, why would you not just ask for Lauda to be banned? Or do you prefer oppression?

About Ascendancy. I took a small part in that project as I knew some people working on it (not the devs.. lol). From what I saw and what I understood from the people involved, this had nothing to do with the escrows. And all of the escrows, in particular lauda worked tirelessly to get back the stolen funds. Did you really do your due diligence on this one?

A certain portion of the people that had legacy scammer tags still have a "hidden scammer tag" that includes restrictions against deleting posts in self moderated threads, you can see this thread for more information. These 'hidden scammer tags' are still occasionally given out to certain (non-penny) scammers.

I am sorry that some people in your group of friends are criminals. I can assure you this is not personal.

It is the job of an escrow agent to secure funds that are part of a transaction, and to return funds to one party if the other runs away and does not fulfill their obligations of a transaction, as was the case of the "devs" of the altcoin that Lauda was acting as escrow for. As mentioned above, Lauda failed to secure the funds that are part of the transaction in question. I do not have access to what was posted by the "devs" as the "escrow agreement" however the evidence points to (and there is no conclusive evidence to suggest otherwise) that Lauda would only receive funds intended to purchase the new altcoin every several hours, and there were no clear warnings posted by any of the escrow providers that this was the case -- even using the most liberal definition of escrow, this is in no way providing escrow services.

I would also point out that this is not the first time that Lauda was involved in a sketchy "project" that ended up scamming, here is another example, although less money appears to have been scammed, Lauda was advertising/endorsing this service despite the clear warnings of a scam.

This is absurd.

Lauda did a nice job moderating, and their actions of "extortion" did not end in anyone's coins being stolen. If anything, their position as moderator was not as much influenced by this than Theymos and his pals trying to distance themselves as far as possible.

What it looks like to me is that someone felt the need to complain that they, who also is accused of doing something wrong but didn't make anything or even affect anyone else, have been begged when Lauda, in a similar case, isn't really "feeling the heat".

How come we don't see all this drama with censorship on altcoins threads, Theymos' dox, Block stream, etc? Why all on Lauda? You're making a mountain of a molehill.

You are wrong.

[Quickseller]

I don't think it is fair that you are assuming laudas gender identity. I feel like you could be more sensitive and use gender neturel pronouns

See this post.

[Lauda]

1 - and defcon23

This is false. No such thing has occurred, not that it is a 'scam' anyways.

2 - You have a list here, in which (at the top of the above post), you yourself admit that you were an escrow agent in a transaction that one party will end up loosing a cumulative ~2.2BTC, due to at best your gross negligence, or more realistically, due to your own malicious planning with the scammer.

Who is exactly going to lose "2.2 BTC"? All the investors are going to be fully repaid as the money has been recovered. The latter is utter nonsense, I was invited to escrow by the same person who invited the other two.

As mentioned above, Lauda failed to secure the funds that are part of the transaction in question.

There were three escrows for a single 3-of-4 multisignature address, and somehow this is my fault

I do not have access to what was posted by the "devs" as the "escrow agreement" however the evidence points to (and there is no conclusive evidence to suggest otherwise) that Lauda would only receive funds intended to purchase the new altcoin every several hours, and there were no clear warnings posted by any of the escrow providers that this was the case -- even using the most liberal definition of escrow, this is in no way providing escrow services.

This was present everywhere, including the agreement and website. Funds were to be transferred every 8 hours to an escrow address to which minerjones, yahoo, the "devs" and myself had access to. It still remains a mystery in regards of this not being personal considering that you're making conclusions when you don't even know a quarter of the story.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I don't think it is fair that you are assuming laudas gender identity. I feel like you could be more sensitive and use gender neturel pronouns

Oh please, get over yourself.  I refuse to be that politically correct.

Quickseller is the very definition of a hypocrite.  I can't count the number of times he has called out others for doing exactly what he does.

I've stayed out of this, because it's gotten ridiculous.  He is indeed the dictionary definition of hypocrite, and these continued attacks on Lauda are just silly--with his main accounts and all of his alts.  The only one that's abstained seems to be Panthers52.  There's no way in hell I'm going to take advice about another member here from a known liar and escrow scammer, which is exactly what Quickseller is.  I'm sorry to see Lauda gone from staff, but it's good he/she is still active on the forum.

[Quickseller]

2 - You have a list here, in which (at the top of the above post), you yourself admit that you were an escrow agent in a transaction that one party will end up loosing a cumulative ~2.2BTC, due to at best your gross negligence, or more realistically, due to your own malicious planning with the scammer.

Who is exactly going to lose "2.2 BTC"? All the investors are going to be fully repaid as the money has been recovered. The latter is utter nonsense, I was invited to escrow by the same person who invited the other two.

http://archive.is/FcUCo#selection-3375.0-3397.12

Total claimed (so far): 14.36578859
Claim percentage: 95.0645714%
Current loss rate (assuming 100% claimed): 15.30515375%

Simple math works out to so that ~2.2 will not be repaid according to your own "update". This is also ignoring the fact that the "dev" was posting that large amounts of BTC were being invested shortly before he ran away with the money you were suppose to be securing.

The fact that you were able to recover money so quickly is very suspect as well.

 

As mentioned above, Lauda failed to secure the funds that are part of the transaction in question.

There were three escrows for a single 3-of-4 multisignature address, and somehow this is my fault

I believe it is all of your faults. You are the only one who is preventing others from pointing out your failures as an escrow on the relevant thread.

[Lauda]

Simple math works out to so that ~2.2 will not be repaid according to your own "update".

That part is supposed to be updated once the funds have arrived to the escrow address. Due to you jumping to conclusions I've mentioned that people would be fully repaid earlier than expected. As Yahoo outlined in another thread, we are waiting for Coinbase to process.

This is also ignoring the fact that the "dev" was posting that large amounts of BTC were being invested shortly before he ran away with the money you were suppose to be securing.

Those investments were apparently bogus. If they weren't, I'd expect a lot of people claiming their BTC back.

The fact that you were able to recover money so quickly is very suspect as well.

Losing money = suspicious; recovering money = suspicious. Completely objective assessment indeed.

I believe it is all of your faults. You are the only one who is preventing others from pointing out your failures as an escrow on the relevant thread.

Another lie.. I can't prevent anyone from saying anything. I made a thread solely for claiming back investments. If you want to discuss, open your own ASC thread and do whatever you want.

[BitcoinEXpress]

Hopefully Saltyspitoon will lock this thread like he did the other one.


~BCX~

[SaltySpitoon]

Hopefully Saltyspitoon will lock this thread like he did the other one.


~BCX~

The last thread was locked because the topic was no longer relevant, and the conversation degraded into a continuation of a fight that no longer had to due with the topic. QS is welcome to accuse Lauda or anyone else for that matter of whatever they want, but games aside, this thread is a scam accusation, not a request to have a forum feature removed from a user. QS has been here long enough to know that there isn't any situation where even a confirmed scammer would have posting features limited, not only because I doubt its possible to do on a user by user basis, but because Bitcointalk administration doesn't get involved in interpersonal disputes.

So calling this what it is, I moved the thread into reputation rather than Meta. As with all threads about self moderation, if you don't like it, make your own thread where the OP can't moderate it.

[Quickseller]

QS has been here long enough to know that there isn't any situation where even a confirmed scammer would have posting features limited,

I would think that a global moderator would know that there is...in fact several examples of this.

[Vod]

QS has been here long enough to know that there isn't any situation where even a confirmed scammer would have posting features limited,

I would think that a global moderator would know that there is...in fact several examples of this.

Three year old policies.  Default Trust has been implemented because your example - and you know this.

Time to ban Quickseller?