Do we have a potential fraudster among us?

[augustocroppo]

I noticed that one potential fraudster got the VIP status while responding serious accusation in the open forum. Traderfortress, a.k.a. Yan Kevin Wang, not just had the funds to acquire a VIP status but as well to pay for deceiving advertisement against the OpenCoin's software, Ripple.

However, Mr Wang refuse to honor his past agreements, such as return the money he got from a programming job which he did not finished.

We shall give a chance to Mr Wang explain what is really going on before to proceed for a precise investigation of his affairs.

So, Mr Wang, what is the deal? Are you going to honor your past agreements or do you prefer to have your profile exposed in the open forum?

We do not really tolerate fraudsters among us, Mr Wang. See what happened with Pirateat40, R+, PatrickHarnett, Cryptoxchange and Matthew N. Wright. They VIP and donator status were not enough for them avoid the consequences of their fraudulent actions.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Hmm, because of another of your responses, it's quite obvious that this is in response of my exposure of a closed source payments system competing with Bitcoin. I encourage you to read through the information that already exists on the subject. It's interesting that you use the terms unfinished, as the product delivered was for bitcoind (which he can't run on shared hosting). We agreed to rework it with blockchain.info's API, and I agree that the development was rocky. Problems were caused with PHP incompatibilities, tormail being sent to spam, and I was happy and willing to work with him through the whole process.

MoneyPakTrader, on the day before he wanted a full refund, thanked me and asked if I need any more coins because of the extra work with his setup as well as implementing more features which I did for free (not part of his scope). I think that should give an unbiased third party the reasons behind his scam accusation - BTC rose, he wants to get now 10x more than what he paid in USD terms.

It's also funny, because you tried to bluff with dox, but you got it incorrectly. I do appreciate your passive aggressive PM.

[augustocroppo]

Hmm, because of another of your responses, it's quite obvious that this is in response of my exposure of a closed source payments system competing with Bitcoin. I encourage you to read through the information that already exists on the subject.

Nah... If it is something which is competing with Bitcoin is not the Ripple software, but that fresh new pump-and-dump currency, Elacoin. Right? I know you are involved with that... Is quite obvious from the evidence I have on you.

It's interesting that you use the terms unfinished, as the uproduct delivered was for bitcoind (which he can't run on shared hosting). We agreed to rework it with blockchain.info's API, and I agree that the development was rocky. Problems were caused with PHP incompatibilities, tormail being sent to spam, and I was happy and willing to work with him through the whole process.

MoneyPakTrader, on the day before he wanted a full refund, thanked me and asked if I need any more coins because of the extra work with his setup as well as implementing more features which I did for free (not part of his scope).

Let's refresh your memory:

I am offering to pay for legally binding arbitration. You choose any reputable service, I pay for it if it's within the general price range. I suggest judge.me. Since you apparently never heard of it, try Google.

You offered to pay for the arbitration, but later you refused to participate in the arbitration under the pretext that you did not received an invoice or payment instructions from judge.me. It is obvious at this point that you never had any intention to settle the dispute in a fair manner. All you did was throw excuse after excuse to avoid as much as possible to pay back the work you did not properly finished. Moreover, you did not even published the source code of your work to a third-party verify if you really delivered what you are claiming above.

I think that should give an unbiased third party the reasons behind his scam accusation - BTC rose, he wants to get now 10x more than what he paid in USD terms.

The only reason behind the scam accusation is you, the potential fraudster. On 2nd March you confirmed you were participating in the arbitration. So your pretext that 'BTC rose, he wants to get now 10x more than what he paid in USD terms' is literally bogus and typical from fraudsters which try to blame the victim for their actions. You had enough time to enter the arbitration and settle the dispute.

It's also funny, because you tried to bluff with dox, but you got it incorrectly. I do appreciate your passive aggressive PM.

I am not bluffing and you certainly do not know what I already have on you.

This is just the begin...

You will regret to have used your victim's money to become a VIP member once I finish.

Here you do not have your army of paid shills to protect you and disturb the conversation.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I don't respond to threats or "blackmail", so have fun being here

[augustocroppo]

To expose and bring awareness to the flaws in the Ripple payment system, I am giving away 1 BTC on Ripple.

This is a social experiment. Therefore, posts not consisting of an Ripple address to send 1 BTC to will be deleted.

How it works

1. Register for a bitcointalk.org forum account if you haven't
2. Complete the following steps in your light (not a full node) Ripple client:



So you can copy and paste the address we're sending your bitcoin from, it's rH3bZsvVUhzugvcYuJVoSYCEMHkfK6wHNv

3. Post your address here. I will send at least 1 BTC to your address.

That's it!

I suggest reading RippleScam.org afterwards. Please note that you must exchange your bitcoins with an liquidity provider (Ripple does this automatically, when paths are calculated) in order to withdraw them from a gateway.

This social experiment has ended - here was the goals:

1) teach people that Ripple BTCs are not real BTCs
2) teach people that your BTC.* can be substituted for anything you trust, automatically

There was also mass invasion of ripple.com/forum posters. It's not too hard to figure out who they are. Keep this in mind:

1) I have not profited at all from this.
2) Anyone who lost BTC.* had their BTCs exchanged by other people.
3) Anyone who I sent a BTC to could have redeemed someone else's Bitstamp or whatever IOU.

Please read http://ripplescam.org/ to learn more!

[augustocroppo]

It's roughly comparable to proving that Bitcoin is broken by starting an exchange or web-based wallet and then running off with the money or tricking people into deleting their wallet files. It's a Luddite attack on Bitcoin, Ripple, and technology in general -- an attempt to prove that people are too stupid to have powerful tools.

They are different because Bitcoin does not allow, say, Instawallet to replace 100 BTC in bitcoin-qt with 100 "BTC" in Instawallet without your explicit approval. Nobody would have lost anything if users had to click "I will trade 10 BTC.Bitstamp for 10 BTC.TradeFortress.

Bitcoin allows instawallet to do whatever they want without anyone's approval. Both "attacks" take advantage of the fact that you can trick people into doing things that have negative consequences that they might not be aware of.

Both attacks involve tricking someone into doing something that can have negative consequences of which they may not be aware and then exploiting the results of that trick. Even if it required explicit approval, you could just as easily trick people into providing that approval. By requiring it of them before making a payment to them.

http://www.hrmorning.com/would-you-trade-your-password-for-a-candy-bar/

He's convincing people to hurt themselves with powerful technology as a way of arguing that people are too dumb to have that technology or the technology is bad because it enables people to hurt themselves. It's completely different from arguing that there should be better safeties or warnings.

For example, consider a hammer. A person can bash their thumb with a hammer. The Luddite argument is that because people can bash their thumb with a hammer, hammers are bad. Or, worse, convincing people to use hammers carelessly so you can show lots of pictures of black and blue thumbs to stop this scourge of evil hammers. It's not at all the same as arguing that because people can bash their thumbs with a hammer, people need to understand how to safely use hammers or that it might be worth investigating whether a hammer can be designed such that it's more difficult to hit your thumb.

[augustocroppo]

What TF did was entirely within the Ripple system, unless you have an analogy where Bitcoin itself was compromised, your argument falls apart.  

It wasn't entirely within the Ripple system. He approached people outside the Ripple system and used mechanisms outside Ripple to convince them to do things. And it wasn't Ripple itself that was compromised, it was just the accounts of the people who did what he told them to do. He told people to tell Ripple to consider a worthless asset as equal in value to a valuable asset, and Ripple did exactly what they told it to do. He used social engineering to induce people to tell a system to do dumb things, then the system did dumb things, and then he blamed it on the system rather than on himself.

No, the design of the system is bad. If it didn't automatically trade IOUs for you, then nobody would have lost any BTC.Bit stamp.

Sure they would have. If it didn't do it automatically, you would just have had to trick them into enabling it. There's no reason to think that would have been any more difficult than tricking them into trusting you.

[augustocroppo]

(You can join if you're not a newbie too )

You need at least 10 posts to carry links in your signature! Please only participate if/when you have 10 posts.

1. Replace your sig with the following:

Code:

[url=http://coinlenders.com][size=12pt][glow=#FFF263,1,1][b]CoinLenders - earn interest, get loans[/glow][/size][/url]  [size=12pt][url=http://coinchat.org][size=12pt][glow=#84E886,1,1][b] [color=#08700A]☕ Free bitcoins chatting - CoinChat[/color][/glow][/url][/size][size=12pt] [url=http://ripplescam.org][size=12pt][b][color=#FF0000]⚠ Ripple is a scam[/color][/url][/size]
[size=2][url=https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=198947.0][b]1 BTC[/b] raffle - free to enter![/url] You can include your bitcoin address here if you wish[/size]

It looks like this:

CoinLenders - earn interest, get loans   ☕ Free bitcoins chatting - CoinChat ⚠ Ripple is a scam
1 BTC raffle - free to enter! You can include your bitcoin address here if you wish

2. Reply with a BTC address here.

3. After 1 month from now, a random winner will receive 1 BTC sent to their address. Simple as that. You must have this in your sig for the entire duration of this raffle.

The prize will be prorated to 0.01 BTC / reply if there are less than 100 entries to this raffle. So if 70 people enter, then the prize will be BTC0.70

[augustocroppo]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=76065

[augustocroppo]

LOL? Prove that I have "changed my deposit address", that was the auto generated one. You can't even change it, bitcoind or Blockchain.info doesn't let you. It looks like a vanity address through  

Anyway, show me the damages I've done to you. Which is nothing other than your sites relutation, which I think is fair - an eye for an eye. I regularly try to break into sites, and I always disclose it to the owners without any malicious damages done. For some people, I do it publicly.

Here: htmlentities( [db output] ). It's funny how there is so many responses yet no one knows basic web security.

[augustocroppo]

Oh TradeFORtress was the one that coded your site? I didn't read that part, I thought it was someone with a copycat name.

Your an idiot, Tradefortress is a legend, your rant is random, probably fake scam report, and invalid. If your site got hacked by someone else, still your fault, it's your website.

/Thread

Potential fraudster cannot properly finish the services he offers, but he is a "legend"!

That is literally sarcastic. It made me laugh hard!

Tradefortress is already showing contradictions in his statements:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=76065



MoneypakTrader.com accused Tradefortress of something that Tradefortress already confessed to be true.

[augustocroppo]

In fact TradeFortress is breaching our contract!

I got spam PM from him:

I'll pay you 25 BTC if you use Inputs.io for Peerbet!

My reply:

I agree for the price.
What obligations do you require from me?

Thanks.

TradeFortress reply:

Sign up for inputs.io with something like btc@peerbet.org - get an API key and set a callback to peerbet.org/callback.pup

In that file, check to make sure the request came from our IP address. Look up the from email in your database. If it exists, credit that account with the btc deposited. If not, send it back with the note saying "No user found"

For withdrawals, just call the send API to do that. It's a good idea to add a link for deposits that points at the request payment URL.

Let me know when you've implemented the API, since inputs.io isn't released yet leave your current system. But I will pay you 25 btc when Inputs launches and you make it inputs exclusive

My reply:

I want to store Peerbet's funds on offline PC with Bitcoin-qt for better security and review withdrawals manually as I do it now.

About deposit API I agree and can change Peerbet's scripts to work with your service right now, but at first I would like to receive promised Bitcoins to 1G5FG5yyFjaEunXgYXVy5BP81UW1R6VGde.

Thanks.

He sent 25 BTC and THEN responded:

OK, you can simply send the coins to the offline address after recving them. But you will need to use Inputs.io meaning people need to deposit funds from the off chain network and get withdrawals through the off chain network.

I have sent 25 BTC.

This means that before receiving payment I don't took an obligation to remove off-blockhain deposits.
Nevertheless, I agree to comply with terms of our contract to integrate Inputs.io ALONG WITH normal blockchain deposits.

That wasn't what we agreed to. It was Inputs.io exclusive for deposits. Without a clarifying statement on deposits, it means all deposits.

I explicitly asked you about conditions:

I agree for the price.
What obligations do you require from me?

and you had to answer BEFORE signing a contract by sending payment. By default Bitcoin deposits mean using Bitcoin blockhain, not third-party IOU.

giantdragon is only offering to refund 20 BTC out of the 25 BTC, despite doing nothing whatsoever. I do not accept partial payments, and I only accept a full repayment. giantdragon is claiming that it is for "moral damage for me". However, he has refused to refund the full BTC when I have tried to work it out with him through PMs.

I just offered an option to solve our dispute and close the contract.
Otherwise I still agree to follow contract and integrate Inputs.io into Peerbet (but leave direct blockchain deposits).

giantdragon is only offering to refund 20 BTC out of the 25 BTC, despite doing nothing whatsoever. I do not accept partial payments, and I only accept a full repayment. giantdragon is claiming that it is for "moral damage for me". However, he has refused to refund the full BTC when I have tried to work it out with him through PMs.

I just offered an option to solve our dispute and close the contract.
Otherwise I still agree to follow contract and integrate Inputs.io into Peerbet (but leave direct blockchain deposits).

You left me negative feedback and wasted my time too, so I will be billing you 5 BTC too.

25 - 5 + 5 = 25.

Thanks!

You first send me SPAM message and started this dispute. I would never enter into this contract if know what condition do you really mean.

So both delete the negative feedback ? Then there is no need to charge him 5 BTC for negative feedback and give him his coins back.

I agree to remove my negative feedback if he removes mine, but I think I still deserve moral damage compensation for time lost.
Anyways, I still agree to follow contract and add Inputs.io ALONG WITH direct deposits.

I have deleted my replies in the Peerbet thread. I will only remove posts in this topic after I receive payment. Please don't keep asking.

I think refund will take about 30 mins.

25 BTC refunded to 1GLadosEkeAsLReqS3yQ51E1R3wVtbJCDF.
Remove this thread.

TradeFortress, I think you should leave positive feedback on my profile for decision to voluntarily make a refund.

25 BTC refunded to 1GLadosEkeAsLReqS3yQ51E1R3wVtbJCDF.
Remove this thread.

TradeFortress, I think you should leave positive feedback on my profile for decision to voluntarily make a refund.

It's up to you to delete your posts now.

[augustocroppo]

For a scammer tag, the accused person needs to have promised to do something and then failed to deliver on the promise. TradeFortress never promised to pay anyone any bitcoins here. If you trust him to do something that he didn't promise, that's your problem.

Promises:

I am offering to pay for legally binding arbitration. You choose any reputable service, I pay for it if it's within the general price range. I suggest judge.me. Since you apparently never heard of it, try Google.

To expose and bring awareness to the flaws in the Ripple payment system, I am giving away 1 BTC on Ripple.

[augustocroppo]

So, today I accessed my account and found that I have received negative trust from two users, DiamondCardz and TradeFortress.

Here is a copy of the pms:

I sent this to both of them:

Hello,

I noticed you left me negative trust, can I ask why?

I am the operate for the YACoin p2p pool node http://pool.bitcn.org:8336/static/ here is the forum thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=204890

I have not scamming anyone and the trust you left me is very confusing. Can you please explain why or otherwise I will have to ask a mod to remove your trust.

Here are the replies I received:

Hi,

Join me on Freenode - /query TradeFortress

I am not dumb.

I've been told to leave you negative trust because you are part of a phishing ring. (I was told so by a trusted member with lots of rep)

I have not scamming anyone and the trust you left me is very confusing. Can you please explain why or otherwise I will have to ask a mod to remove your trust.

Mods don't remove trust, I believe. I'll contact the person who told me to leave the trust about it, ofc I'm not going to elaborate further because this "phishing ring" goes quite deep and I'm trying to stop it.

After checking the information, this trust will not be removed as your account was bought.

Here is the PM I sent back to TradeFortress:

Huh? I have nothing to say to you.

Just to let you know I've reported you to a moderator, but can you please explain why you left that negative trust, it doesn't make any sense. How is my account a scam or phishing account? I find this whole thing very confusing...

And to DiamondCardz:

Umm... what? This is not a premium account it's a free one, and what would that have to do with anything?

Just to let you know I've reported you to a moderator.

And here is the replies I received:

I'm happy to talk to you.

http://webchat.freenode.net/

Enter your nickname.

Type /query TradeFortress

Say hi.

k9k9k9k9k9k9k

Listen, join me on IRC and I'm happy to talk to you.

Or do you prefer BitMessage or Cryptocat?

As you can see, it's clear this TradeFortress person told DiamondCardz to leave me negative trust, he seems to want me to chat 'off-site' which I do not feel comfortable doing.

I have search the forums and found a number of scam accusations against this TradeFortress so I have decided to block him as I think he is trying to scam me.

It's also clear that DiamondCardz blindly left me trust without actually believing it too.

Can I ask a mod to please remove this fake feedback? I have not scammed anyone and do not see any reason to warrant negative trust.

[augustocroppo]

http://www.erepublik.com/en/citizen/profile/1492574

http://www.youtube.com/user/lailai625

http://lailai625.deviantart.com/

http://www.kongregate.com/accounts/lailai625

http://www.gaiaonline.com/profiles/lailai625/12652755/

http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/4531-worst-thing-that-ever-happened-to-minecraft/

Posted 12 January 2010 - 04:12 AM
This... Abomination, has infiltrated our somewhat peaceful game (save greifers) and has completely ruined an ENTIRE FEATURE of this game that paying users receive. Lailai recently came onto CG62's server and asked to be let out. We denied him when he did not show the password, so we kicked him. When he came back, we banned him. Then he come on Lailai2 and I IP banned him. That was the last I thought we would here of him. Well I went on happily RP until someone in the RP shouts, that LaiLai, has committed a horrific crime. He released the indev version of minecraft. This may not seem like a big feature to non-paying users, but this is what seperates paying players from non-paying. It is the only useful thing that we have. It allows us to test indev things, such as fire or tools. This is alot of fun to play around in and is the best feature a paying player gets. Well, LaiLai decided to ruin that. I won't release the address to the public for obvious reasons, but this is what is on his page:


If this is not working / you have a problem / you have a question, email me at lailai625@hotmail.com and I'll try to fix it

This version of the game is under heavy development, and will contain bugs! But why should you fucking care about them?

PEOPLE WHO HAVE VISITED THE SITE 000149 Please do report bugs you find in this version to notch



(Indev Version screen goes here)



News: Working inventory items (press I).
Fire, spreads from tile to tile!
New level generation screen
Sound engine by Paul Lamb
Press F7 to save an isometric map. Press I to access the inventory
enjoy no more pre-peeks haha

There are 2 things I wish to point out in this. One is at the very end:

enjoy no more pre-peeks haha

So his main goal was to prevent paying players from receiving this function. In the real Indev version, Notch says he will not release the indev anymore if someone publishes it. God this guy is evil.

Two is somewhere near the beginning:

lailai625@hotmail.com

Now, I'm not usually a bad guy when it comes to revenge, but this guy has really got me ticked. I won't say anything if you decided to COMPLETELY FLOOD HIS E-MAIL WITH COMPLAINTS.

I beg Notch to please not shut down Indev for all the paying players who love this game so much. PLEASE NOTCH, DO NOT SHUT IT DOWN!

Sorry to anyone who payed, and this makes them lose indev, but I could not bear to watch this guy STEAL MONEY from Notch. If you do not believe me, there will probably, in the very near future, be an announcement about this entire ordeal.

Once again, that's:

lailai625@hotmail.com

[augustocroppo]

In one single page Tradefortress alias Milkshake is answered by Tradefortress's shill, Atruk:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145095.msg1539040#msg1539040

It's more of 'is this user important or not', a lot of people are serious.

Serious / important people:
conspirosphere.tk
PsychoticBoy - runs ABM
usagi - ran GLBSE funds with questionable practices, silver asset is pretty legit
TradeFortress - btcinvest looks promising
Deprived - very active in the securities section with high quality contributions
MPOE-PR frequently trolling but you're stupid if you ignore her
Namworld - runs various high quality assets (except BTCMINING which loaned out their coins during the period where loans were like the mortgage bubble)

Totally ignore because troll
Monster Tent - "P.S. In almost all cases where someone uses a woman as their forum avatar they turn out to be a scammer. " LOL

Just irrelevant (/ not important)
The people here aren't people you should ignore - a lot of people here trade bitcoins, buys assets, et cetra but they're not really people I consider important.

Tritonio
marketersales - asks for loans and lawns straight out of newbie queue
regular
camolist - not important
stochastic - lots of posts, doesn't matter
viboracecata
Bitinvestor
dishwara - not important, he did run the DISHWARA asset in a pretty joke style

Undetermined
WinTame2012

Post an address and claim your prize.

Not quite the rankings I'd give. I'd throw some people in different categories. Still, it seems like you put some effort into it.

The evidence which links Tradefortress to Elacoin and shows that Milkshake is his sock puppet:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=203647

Most alt coins have a very short life, because they're not announced in advance, and the only users of it are the early adapters or the preminers. Elacoin is an open cryptocurrency based on the Scrypt hashing algorithm, with a few innovative modifications:

OFFICIAL WARNING: AlternativeCypt IS A SCAMMER. DO NOT TRADE WITH HIM, HE CLAIMED TO HAVE MORE ELACOINS THAN WHICH WERE MINED



Elastic block reward algorithm based on the difficulty and Moore's Law
The more computational power you throw at it, the more each block will give.
The reward is halved every nine months to preserve the coin's value.

Stable Currency that Regulates Itself Through Supply and Demand
Less demand? Less hashpower, less block reward, less supply. Same value.
High demand? More hashpower, more block reward, more supply. Same value.

Fast Payments and Confirmations
The block target is one every 2 minutes, which is the perfect amount.
Fast enough without running into network IO limits, or bloating your hard drive.

Open to everyone. No premining, no shenanigans, announced release
Elacoin will be released after 24 hours of this message. Elacoin is not premined,
with the genesis block timestamping "Traffic from Syria Disappears from Internet".

The genesis block for Elacoin will be released after 24 hours of OP. Get your scrypt
miners ready (a miner is included in the client), and have fun  

Elacoin has being released! http://github.com/elacoin/elacoin

Official forum - on AltcoinForum.org

Elacoin Website

Elacoin Wiki

#elacoin on Freenode

Tradefortress's sock puppet pretending to do an investigation on Tradefortress's business to appear not related to Tradefortress's schemes:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=159359.msg2749230#msg2749230

Hello,

I am doing an investigation into TradeFortress, regarding possible scams, and I'm seeking transaction ID's of deposits/withdrawals from coinlenders.

If you feel comfortable anonymously disclosing your transaction ID's or information related to any possible scams TradeFortress has commited, you can send it to tfinvestigate@tormail.org

Your anonymity is ensured.

Kind regards,
Milkshake

[augustocroppo]

I collected some data from the post history from Tradefortress and Milkshake. I compared the data and realized that on 19th February 2013 both users produced posts at different times, following a pattern which indicates that both users are controlled by one single person. Observe the time of each post:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqgZtLSqKPzQdFBrUGpLWTlVYm9pdDJoVlRtcFNJRVE&usp=sharing

[augustocroppo]

http://centralops.net/co/DomainDossier.aspx?addr=inputs.io&dom_dns=1&dom_whois=1&net_whois=1

Domain : inputs.io
Status : Live
Expiry : 2014-06-21

NS 1   : ns1.linode.com
NS 2   : ns2.linode.com

Owner  : Inputs.io
       : Cloud bitcoin wallets
       :  
       : Sydney
       : NSW
       : Australia

name   class   type   data   time to live
inputs.io   IN   A   50.116.37.202   86400s   (1.00:00:00)
inputs.io   IN   SOA   
server:   ns1.linode.com
email:admin@glados.cc
serial:   2013062508
refresh:   14400
retry:   14400
expire:   1209600
minimum ttl:   86400
86400s   (1.00:00:00)

[augustocroppo]

Before:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:39XNQcl2QC0J:https://109.201.133.65/index.php%3Ftopic%3D118719.0+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&lr=lang_en%7Clang_pt



After:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118719.0




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130024.0

I am currently selling two items. Buy em up! If you have any questions feel free to ask me here. Please post feedback if you buy.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=131297.0

-$10 Walmart Gift Card -> http://ca3.cc/bitlockr/item.php?id=4297480



-$15 Starbucks Gift Card -> http://ca3.cc/bitlockr/item.php?id=5738430 SOLD

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130763.0

Selling one adult village cinema voucher:

"This voucher entitles one adult to attend a movie session at any of the following Village Cinemas locations – Airport West, Albury, Century City, Coburg, Crown,
Doncaster, Eastlands, Fountain Gate, Geelong, Glenorchy, Hobart, Jam Factory, Karingal, Knox, Launceston, Morwell, Rivoli, Shepparton, Southland, Sunshine and
Werribee. For films showing and session times check villagecinemas.com.au. It may take up to 60 minutes after purchasing this voucher before it can be redeemed
online.  This voucher is valid for one adult admission only, and is to be surrendered at the cinema box office for a ticket or redeemed online. Gift Vouchers do not
guarantee a reserved seat - seating is subject to availability. Vouchers are not valid for Gold Class, group bookings, movie marathons, special events or in
conjunction with any other offer or promotion unless otherwise stated. A surcharge applies for Vmax and 3D/Real D films. It is the responsibility of the holder of the
voucher to ensure that it is used prior to the expiry date. The expiry date is not extendable. This voucher expires at midnight on the date listed. Tickets are not
refundable or redeemable for cash. Any advertisement, circulation or publication, which includes a reference to movie vouchers, must first be approved in writing by
Village Cinemas."

Purchase it here: http://ca3.cc/bitlockr/item.php?id=8451259

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=203647.msg2138497#msg2138497

Oh why not. Have fun.

http://ca3.cc/elacoin.zip

Gee thanks for ruining this launch...

Wasn't planning on it until I saw the premined 1360 block chain. I just exposed it for what it is

I'll also take this opportunity to say that someone who can't even compile their own client really has no business releasing their own coin.

You could have waited for a reply from milkshake at least.

[augustocroppo]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=81730



Coincidences...

- The domain bitcoin- talk.org was registered by a company with the PO Box 0823-03411
- DNS record of the domain bitcoin- talk.org shows similar data found in the domain elacoin.net DNS record
- Last record change was two days after Tradefortress left a negative feedback in his sock puppet trust profile

 

Domain ID:D169045063-LROR
Domain Name:BITCOIN- TALK.ORG
Created On:25-Jun-2013 02:47:36 UTC
Last Updated On:19-Jul-2013 11:09:58 UTC
Expiration Date:25-Jun-2014 02:47:36 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:eNom, Inc. (R39-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:21f7f92e3f8f08b0
Registrant Name:WhoisGuard Protected
Registrant Organization:WhoisGuard, Inc.
Registrant Street1:P.O. Box 0823-03411
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Panama
Registrant State/Province:Panama
Registrant Postal Code:NA
Registrant Country:PA
Registrant Phone:+507.8365503
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+51.17057182
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:33ee68fcc8324db99c3ca156d3ca8014.protect@whoisguard.com
Admin ID:21f7f92e3f8f08b0
Admin Name:WhoisGuard Protected
Admin Organization:WhoisGuard, Inc.
Admin Street1:P.O. Box 0823-03411
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Panama
Admin State/Province:Panama
Admin Postal Code:NA
Admin Country:PA
Admin Phone:+507.8365503
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:+51.17057182
Admin FAX Ext.:
Admin Email:33ee68fcc8324db99c3ca156d3ca8014.protect@whoisguard.com
Tech ID:21f7f92e3f8f08b0
Tech Name:WhoisGuard Protected
Tech Organization:WhoisGuard, Inc.
Tech Street1:P.O. Box 0823-03411
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Panama
Tech State/Province:Panama
Tech Postal Code:NA
Tech Country:PA
Tech Phone:+507.8365503
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:+51.17057182
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:33ee68fcc8324db99c3ca156d3ca8014.protect@whoisguard.com
Name Server:DNS1.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server:DNS2.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server:DNS3.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server:DNS4.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM
Name Server:DNS5.REGISTRAR-SERVERS.COM