HI THEYMOS Why a small group of DT Members & Mods are trying 2 protect Scammers?

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I'm disappointed that aTriz chose to go the route he did, and to call a lie a "marketing strategy" is bending the truth past the breaking point. 

I'm disappointed because I think he's an excellent campaign manager and an agreeable gentleman as well, and that's a rare combination on bitcointalk.  The interaction I've had with him thus far has been positive.  I do hope he realizes the error here and doesn't let greed cloud his judgement henceforth. 

I'm going to change my positive to a neutral, and I'm hoping for some recognition of the problem on his part--the refund is a positive step.  We'll see where this goes.

[mdayonliner]

Note: Whenever there is a topic accusing aTriz, we see he keeps almost silent.
Excludes OP: 0/20, actively participated, 0/40, First reply after 43 comments - 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th... and few more out of 498 conversations.
He goes on holidays? May be aTriz does not have much time to deal with these nonsense?

Or he/she know these barking dogs (us) will eventually become silent someday cause Lauda has his back.

Lauda I understand it's hard for you to be unbiased on acknowledging aTriz's errors. After all you both already established a trust with each others before even starting the ALU. This is not the only error (aTriz's) we are talking about. By the way I am no way in any position to accuse you for anything, I am talking human psychology.

One user means more for you than the whole community?
ibminer, Quickseller, OgNasty, allahabadi, Bazinga442, suchmoon and the list goes on. All these people do not have a valid point? Note: Most of these people are Legendary.

I've pointed out the people with valid, objective, points.

ibminer, Quickseller, OgNasty, allahabadi, Bazinga442, suchmoon
-If you read all the comments from each of these individuals then they DO MAKE valid points. Don't just read the only one comment those were on the screenshots.

Please admit it that aTriz does not qualify to be a campaign manager. Your reputation is on stake because of the user aTriz.

It's not a black and white issue. Did he make a mistake? Yes. Does this mistake have consequences? Yes. Does this mean he isn't capable of managing campaigns? I can't come to this conclusion out of such premises. Despite the mistakes he made, he has shown to be very capable in managing them[1] despite his recent errors in judgement.

- Yes, I understand it's NOT black and white however it's a start for you to become more careful.

I will say the same thing like The Pharmacist said...

I'm disappointed that aTriz chose to go the route he did, and to call a lie a "marketing strategy" is bending the truth past the breaking point. 

I'm disappointed because I think he's an excellent campaign manager and an agreeable gentleman as well...

Honestly speaking if I were you and if I were a 100% morally honest person then I would kick out aTriz using my name and badge. It would look for someone else for my business.

There's plenty of wrong with this statement, and I'll let you know why. If I was able to just simply kick someone out of a 3-entity group, that would mean that I effectively own it which is not the case here. Obviously, getting to consensus on this matter with the remaining entity shouldn't be too difficult. However, remember the last time I acted quickly without thinking? Oh yeah, I'm still being harassed for it to this day. Some people complain that I act quickly, and then when I don't, they complain that I don't. You can't have it both ways (I'm not talking about you in this particular example).
I need time and more objective input on the matter; the *consequences* or whatever you want to call it from our side (Untold and me) will come.

- You know why people only point you out than the other members in ALU? Because they expect more from you IMO. May be (sorry, I am not a too old member) you have given a lot to this community so the expectation is high.

Again, Your reputation is on stake because of the user aTriz.

I disagree. I'm not responsible for someone else's actions, especially not when I had no knowledge of them.

Your disagreement does not make any sense to me. The error in campaign thing is a part of ALU, you along with others represent ALU. If ALU make a bad name then you also become a part of this bad name.

PS: alia thought I am scam_detector, actually I am not.

It doesn't matter to me as, from what I've seen, you seem to make sense and are not biased on *any* particular case.

- Thank you for your kind words.

[1] Weren't people complimenting this quite frequently, before aTriz caught my eye and before ALU even existed?

- Not sure (I am fairly new to this community, few months only) however I can say one thing which is again, May be (sorry, I am not a too old member) you have given a lot to this community so the expectation is high.

They are doing whatever they want with the official/unofficial power or whatever you call it but no one is doing nothing against it.

Exactly what kind of power does the, non-staff, non-DT, youngling called aTriz have? Indulge me.

- You protecting him a power, you are a DT member is a power, he ganged up with bunches of well reputed members is a power etc.

Aside from ibminer I wouldn't trust anyone on that list, particularly that suchmoon dude.

... adjudicate their personal quarrels.

Yea you are right about suchmoon dude. Another personal quarrel in between ibminer and suchmoon dude? 

PS: I am not feeding anyone's ego. I always try to be unbiased. OgNasty seems a reasonable person (thoroughly looking).

[Lauda]

He goes on holidays? May be aTriz does not have much time to deal with these nonsense?

Or he/she know these barking dogs (us) will eventually become silent someday cause Lauda has his back.

I "don't have his back" on this because he has made a huge error, as in this is much worse than the case regarding alia. I wouldn't know what he could (or should) say publicly about it other than apologizing right now(?). People can't undo what they've done, regardless of how much they wish they could..

-If you read all the comments from each of these individuals then they DO MAKE valid points.

They absolutely do not. The biased agenda there is obvious. ibminer and suchmoon are the ones who made valid points, the remaining pest-generated noise can be safely ignored.

- Yes, I understand it's NOT black and white however it's a start for you to become more careful.

I am, some others aren't.

- You know why people only point you out than the other members in ALU? Because they expect more from you IMO. May be (sorry, I am not a too old member) you have given a lot to this community so the expectation is high.

To be frank, that is just complete bullshit. Do you really think that Quickscammer is commenting because he expects more from me? If you do, then you've been spending your time here in a cave..

The error in campaign thing is a part of ALU, you along with others represent ALU. If ALU make a bad name then you also become a part of this bad name.

The error is aTriz's, not ALU's. For it to be ALU's error, at least 1 more member had to be aware of this and go along with it.

They are doing whatever they want with the official/unofficial power or whatever you call it but no one is doing nothing against it.

Exactly what kind of power does the, non-staff, non-DT, youngling called aTriz have? Indulge me.

- You protecting him a power, you are a DT member is a power, he ganged up with bunches of well reputed members is a power etc.

Therefore, anyone who works with me has power[1]? That does not make sense. I do not protect people unless they are being wrongfully attacked.
[1] I don't even consider DT as "power", but rather an 'ungrateful duty' [duty only if you have some sense of needing to do *something*; some DT members rarely get involved in disputes (scams, abuse and whatnot) so they surely not everyone feels that way - which is okay I guess, there is no obligation to do anything, anywhere].

[suchmoon]

Yea you are right about suchmoon dude. Another personal quarrel in between ibminer and suchmoon dude? 

PS: I am not feeding anyone's ego. I always try to be unbiased. OgNasty seems a reasonable person (thoroughly looking).

Treating Quicksy like he has a point (e.g. by responding here) is all he needs... I'm guilty of it too though.

Og is reasonable until he isn't: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2337754

[Lauda]

Og is reasonable until he isn't: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2337754

I jinxed it (going steady for 3+ months now).

Although, I don't recall many direct conflicts between a DT2 and a DT1 member.

Treating Quicksy like he has a point (e.g. by responding here) is all he needs... I'm guilty of it too though.

One really shouldn't, regardless of the content of the post (we're beyond the scope of logical fallacies here).

[mdayonliner]

Treating Quicksy like he has a point (e.g. by responding here) is all he needs... I'm guilty of it too though.

Og is reasonable until he isn't: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2337754

@suchmoon : Ok that's bad, OgNasty does not make sense in there. No comment on Quicksy mate.


Sorry OgNasty, really mate, you really is not making sense in ur argument

Here's what I see.  A long post gap with a sudden password change.  Then posts trying to get into a signature campaign.  Then posts shilling scamcoins and bumping the bogus scam thread against me.  Like I said, if your account is engaged in shady activity maybe don't bring attention to it...

Here I was about to remove it, then you start threatening and saying I abuse my rank.  Time to ignore instead I guess.  Good day with your purchased account.

This is not how you justify others.

Respecting each others is the key for any community.

(Sorry if I upset you but you need to admit that your dimension was wrong)

- You know why people only point you out than the other members in ALU? Because they expect more from you IMO. May be (sorry, I am not a too old member) you have given a lot to this community so the expectation is high.

To be frank, that is just complete bullshit. Do you really think that Quickscammer is commenting because he expects more from me? If you do, then you've been spending your time here in a cave..

- You are wrong, I did not mean Quicksy when I said the community I meant the whole community not any specific individual. Seems like you and Quicksy has some personal issue. I really never dug the issue. Again I meant the whole community.

[1] I don't even consider DT as "power", but rather an 'ungrateful duty' [duty only if you have some sense of needing to do *something*; some DT members rarely get involved in disputes (scams, abuse and whatnot) so they surely not everyone feels that way - which is okay I guess, there is no obligation to do anything, anywhere].

- Well I guess DT is a power for sure. People take extra care before talking against any DT member (i.e: create new account). It's a power of certified trust from the system (admin). Now it's up to the individual how they will deal with it. Use or misuse.

Anyway Lauda, you have nice negotiation skills. Keep it up.

Please no hurt feeling OgNasty, I said based on what I saw.
EDIT:
PS: You (OgNasty) can still remove his/her redTrust (screenshot). This will restore the respects you already lost from others.

[Lauda]

- You are wrong, I did not mean Quicksy when I said the community I meant the whole community not any specific individual. Seems like you and Quicksy has some personal issue. I really never dug the issue. Again I meant the whole community.

Alright, then you might have a point. I thought you were talking about the people who commented on the situation, out of which (at the time of the previous points) only ibminer and suchmoon were genuine.

[1] I don't even consider DT as "power", but rather an 'ungrateful duty' [duty only if you have some sense of needing to do *something*; some DT members rarely get involved in disputes (scams, abuse and whatnot) so they surely not everyone feels that way - which is okay I guess, there is no obligation to do anything, anywhere].

- Well I guess DT is a power for sure. People take extra care before talking against any DT member (i.e: create new account). It's a power of certified trust from the system (admin). Now it's up to the individual how they will deal with it. Use or misuse.

Well, I guess we can agree that different people see this differently. It's an extra responsibility either way, that's for sure.

Anyway Lauda, you have nice negotiation skills. Keep it up.

I didn't know this was a negotiation.
Anyhow, I think most things got covered already so there is no need for me to discuss this further right now. Not the best start of Q2.

[mdayonliner]

~~~~
Well, I guess we can agree that different people see this differently. It's an extra responsibility either way, that's for sure.

Of course it is an extra sweet responsibility IMO it's an earning, a reward, a recognition of working for the community.

Anyway Lauda, you have nice negotiation skills. Keep it up.

I didn't know this was a negotiation.

No, I did not mean here. Since yesterday when we started this discussion I went through your other discussions as well to gain knowledge about you. This statement was based on overall impression. Take it as complement, I mean nothing else.  

PS: Yes I guess I also think that the discussion ends here.

It's been a pleasure.

[Quickseller]

He goes on holidays? May be aTriz does not have much time to deal with these nonsense?

Or he/she know these barking dogs (us) will eventually become silent someday cause Lauda has his back.

I "don't have his back" on this because he has made a huge error,

These statements you made disagree with this...

I would note that ibminer's above examples are not the only fraudulent statements made regarding that ICO. There are other fraudulent statement in the OP that aTriz himself posted, such as "all monetary transactions with BIBC are processed through secured servers, so users have no need to worry about any risks...

That is absolute, pathetic nonsense. The people who post these threads for others are not vouching for their content, the same way that they are not vouching for the success of the project. Neither one is up to them, and never was. Anyone claiming otherwise has no idea what they're talking about/is showing a clear lack of knowledge and experience.

Maybe "vouch" is not be the best word, but without disclaimers disassociating a campaign manager from the ICO, it is misleading, certainly to new members who probably don't even know campaign managers exist. This may be more of a global issue with managers/ICOs though.

It is a global issue, thus we can't blame anyone individually for it.

[drogbaaa]

The problem of this forum its that we have too much DT members beggars. A DT member cannot be honest or neutral  when a manager buy him for BTC . Thats what happened in all thread of Atriz you see some  DT members cant stop begging for BTC.

[donmiguello]

Well , the scammer have been tagged by his friend.He had no choice , Hope he take this as a lesson.

[owlcatz]

Is owlcatz also a scammer or a criminal? Did he become one when he started saying bad things about you?

While owlcatz has behaved towards me publicly and privately in a way that could warrant a criminal complaint along with his extortion involvement, I think the 5 bogus negative trust ratings he’s left me along with his Freudian slip of the keyboard regarding him being reported to the police and his reaction when I merely alerted Telegram of a scamming account has me leaning more towards the scammer side although both are likely true. You can read the trust ratings yourself and decide. Here I’ll post mine for you. Nice attempt at deflection though.

owlcatz created a bogus scam accusation thread and seemingly admitted to being the scammer impersonating me on Telegram to dupe users searching for escrow. When he was called out on this Freudian slip of the keyboard, he responded by saying, "Fuck both of you scamming window-licking cunts" and then moved the thread to the archive section and locked it.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're just lying for whatever reason.

I don’t lie. That insinuation by you is another attack on my character and while it is a reason for me to not trust you, you haven’t gotten to the level of getting negative feedback yet. Although I will enjoy seeing what you do next to try and earn it.

You do lie and you know it. You can just fuck off again for making shit up like your buddy Quickscammer - Anyone with any common logic knows you are a fucking idiot bully who just tags people red when you disagree or someone makes you mad, or possibly you just feel like being a dick like you did to Eoakland, who was never an alt of anyone you fool.... You openly brag about it in your fucking slack, you scumbag. Anyhow, fuck off - And regarding that last trust rating, I'm MORE than glad to sign any fucking address I've ever posted in the Meta/Post your address here thread.  Again, fuck off with your lies and made up accusations. I closed my thread because your butt buddy QS started doxing me on the thread and you both fucking know that, retards.

Ogscammer & Quickscammer.... LOL, what a couple!

Owlcatz participated in a criminal extortion conspiracy. The last time I checked, that makes him a criminal. Notwithstanding, his behavior is certainly not in line with what I would consider to be remotely trustworthy.

No, I did not. I was made aware of it AFTER the fact. So again, fuck off - You're claims are baseless as fuck, you fool.

Is owlcatz also a scammer or a criminal? Did he become one when he started saying bad things about you?

While owlcatz has behaved towards me publicly and privately in a way that could warrant a criminal complaint, I think the 5 bogus negative trust ratings he’s left me along with his Freudian slip of the keyboard regarding him being reported to the police and his reaction when I merely alerted Telegram of a scamming account has me leaning more towards the scammer side. You can read the trust ratings yourself and decide. Here I’ll post it for you. Nice attempt at deflection though.

owlcatz created a bogus scam accusation thread and seemingly admitted to being the scammer impersonating me on Telegram to dupe users searching for escrow. When he was called out on this Freudian slip of the keyboard, he responded by saying, "Fuck both of you scamming window-licking cunts" and then moved the thread to the archive section and locked it.

I don’t lie. That insinuation by you is another attack on my character and while it is a reason for me to not trust you, you haven’t gotten to the level of getting negative feedback yet. Although I will enjoy seeing what you do next to try and earn it.

I was referring to your very first neg for owlz that seemed to stem from a disagreement that didn't rise to a level of a scam or a crime.

Regarding the telegram thing - it looks to have snowballed from this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3160695.msg32677479#msg32677479

Did you send that message? Seems like you were trying to smear owlcatz behind his back.

Not sure what I'm supposed to be deflecting from. You are the one accusing me of being in cahoots with scammers and criminals with no evidence whatsoever. I can't deflect something that doesn't exist. Post some proof and I'll do the best deflection I can.

Owlcatz participated in a criminal extortion conspiracy. The last time I checked, that makes him a criminal. Notwithstanding, his behavior is certainly not in line with what I would consider to be remotely trustworthy.

Luckily I don't give a shit what you consider to be trustworthy.

LOL... Nobody should, he's only been negged to ruin but still hangs around... probably still scamming for peanuts like the escrow deal in some fashion.

Yes he sent that message, but like a typical malignant narcissist asshole, just doubles down and refuses to answer the fucking question:

HERE WE GO AGAIN: OG - Did you send the PM to Michael Sinclair that I was the scammer on YOUR thread with ZERO evidence or not? No answer? Then I will assume Yes, since we all know you did.  

[allahabadi]

Some members have left negs on the Scammer, let's see what happens further.

But I'm disappointed in the way double standards are being exposed by quite a few people whom I believed to be honest and upright. Either they are silent or not acknowledging the issue at hand while ridiculing others endlessly.

[owlcatz]

Bump

[actisstupidname]

Awww! It was good for a while.

Congratulations to the happy couple! So this is how the merit system looks like in practise:

aTriz rewarding Lauda with 50 merit points for a 'shitpost' (not my choice of word, but often used by those type of people) like this:

Half an hour later Lauda answering aTriz with 20 merit points only for opening a simple bounty thread in November:

Klaaas also wanted to get merit with Lauda and gave his all away for only one commercial opening post:
Link:


Does anyone doubt that any member outside the established circle would get tagged red for such merit farming?

This is just one example of what I mean when I write about abuse of the merit system and abuse of the trust system by the established members.

And now aTriz is thrown under the bus, lest the mastermind gets burned too.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=135920

[donmiguello]

Awww! It was good for a while.

Congratulations to the happy couple! So this is how the merit system looks like in practise:

aTriz rewarding Lauda with 50 merit points for a 'shitpost' (not my choice of word, but often used by those type of people) like this:

Half an hour later Lauda answering aTriz with 20 merit points only for opening a simple bounty thread in November:

Klaaas also wanted to get merit with Lauda and gave his all away for only one commercial opening post:
Link:


Does anyone doubt that any member outside the established circle would get tagged red for such merit farming?

This is just one example of what I mean when I write about abuse of the merit system and abuse of the trust system by the established members.

And now aTriz is thrown under the bus, lest the mastermind gets burned too.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=135920

The merit system is very good but abused by many old members

[audaciousbeing]

I'm disappointed that aTriz chose to go the route he did, and to call a lie a "marketing strategy" is bending the truth past the breaking point. 

I'm disappointed because I think he's an excellent campaign manager and an agreeable gentleman as well, and that's a rare combination on bitcointalk.  The interaction I've had with him thus far has been positive.  I do hope he realizes the error here and doesn't let greed cloud his judgement henceforth. 

I'm going to change my positive to a neutral, and I'm hoping for some recognition of the problem on his part--the refund is a positive step.  We'll see where this goes.

To say disappointment would be an understatement and I expected him to have handled it better. The statement that after two weeks he is being forced to go along just ended the whole thing. Two weeks is early and right time to pull out without even damaging your reputation (it might take a hit but would survive). And now, he not only affect himself but even those who are close to him which is what some people have been looking for as an opportunity to launch an attack.

[actisstupidname]

LMAO, aTriz offers refund because his masters got embarassed. FYI, if the plot wasn't discovered, he would have continued shilling the "marketing strategy" bit.

TLDR; He got caught pants down and offers reparations so that his red tags will get removed. Such is the privilege of working under Bitcointalk's Overlords.

I really would suggest removing signature campaigns altogether! But no, the holy tribunal also needs signature money, fucking lol.

I think the best move is to consider the aTriz account spent and just make a new account. Besides, aTriz is in good company, his masters can stealthily provide merits to the new one.

[mdayonliner]

He goes on holidays? May be aTriz does not have much time to deal with these nonsense?

Or he/she know these barking dogs (us) will eventually become silent someday cause Lauda has his back.

I "don't have his back" on this because he has made a huge error,

These statements you made disagree with this...

I would note that ibminer's above examples are not the only fraudulent statements made regarding that ICO. There are other fraudulent statement in the OP that aTriz himself posted, such as "all monetary transactions with BIBC are processed through secured servers, so users have no need to worry about any risks...

That is absolute, pathetic nonsense. The people who post these threads for others are not vouching for their content, the same way that they are not vouching for the success of the project. Neither one is up to them, and never was. Anyone claiming otherwise has no idea what they're talking about/is showing a clear lack of knowledge and experience.

Maybe "vouch" is not be the best word, but without disclaimers disassociating a campaign manager from the ICO, it is misleading, certainly to new members who probably don't even know campaign managers exist. This may be more of a global issue with managers/ICOs though.

It is a global issue, thus we can't blame anyone individually for it.

Yes, it does however I guess it does not matter anymore... I see Lauda red tagged aTriz (screenshot) means she (I guess female) is showing that she cares and act right whenever needs to.

We change overtime, it's in our nature.

Well done Lauda, you did the right thing when it needed.