mdayonliner

[xtraelv]

I will give you a week from now to until 31 May, 7 days from now (Countdown)

I thought you would have realised that I'm not good with ultimatums or deadlines. I will let you know when I'm done.

It does have to do with this forum because you promote your twitter and website on here which you then use to promote your revshare links.

[bill gator]

I thought posting personal information was against the rules around here and grounds for a ban. It screams "childish" whenever I see someone furiously googling away so they can publish personal information, addresses, phone numbers, pictures and the rest of it. First of all, none of us care about this information. Then, you present it as if we're supposed to do something with this information, all because you received a feedback rating that you disagree with. I have no idea how you deal with people in the real world, because this tactic wouldn't work. Do you just show up at people's work place and show off their most recent tweets? Not only is the "Scam accusation" without validity, but your course of action makes you the bad guy, here. I doubt mdayonliner cares if you publish information that they have already made public, but the intentions you clearly have behind posting it are disgusting.

At this point you are not making your "Scam accusation" any stronger. You are only acting maliciously and pedantic. This thread has turned into OP giving mdayonliner free advertisement for their referral links.

You do not understand the terms "Extortion" or "Blackmail". The point of their "Apology" thread clearly went over your head in the first place.

Timeline is irrelevant. "I will give you 24 hours of time to admit your mistake on my trust removal topic ." Is not  a satisfactory solution.

You do not have to feel that the solution is satisfactory. A user has every right to refuse to revise their feedback left on your profile. Many do not wish to second chances or want to be harassed by everyone they've left negative feedback on. If a user is willing to review their feedback on you within a particular time frame, then there is no problem with that, either. Certain users are willing to review their feedback on your profile after X time, some users are willing to review their feedback on your profile within Y time. Their trust ratings should not matter to you regardless, and as you said timeline is irrelevant; what is more relevant are the actions that lead to your negative in the first place, not the offer to make amends.

I thought you would have realised that I'm not good with deadlines.

Not too good at spelling, either. Now is as good of a time as any to start improving.

[xtraelv]

I thought posting personal information was against the rules around here and grounds for a ban.

At this point you are not making your "Scam accusation" any stronger. You are only acting maliciously and pedantic. This thread has turned into OP giving mdayonliner free advertisement for their referral links.

Not too good at spelling, either. Now is as good of a time as any to start improving.

All the "personal information" is not personal information because it is publicly displayed in many of his posts and freely available in the public domain.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3759887.0 Almost all the info that can be considered personal is contained in that post.

Nothing new. He challenged me to post more - which I haven't done yet. I do respect privacy and some things I will not post.

Phone number and address is a commercial address. Moved to another thread as a precaution in case futher information contains personal information. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4221113.new#new

None of the referral links work anymore - they are to dead ponzi scams.
Running and participating in ponzi scams is illegal in a lot of jurisdictions.

I'm dyslexic - so spelling is a challenge.

[bill gator]

All the personal information was already posted on bitcointalk and referenced. Nothing new.

If ALL of it was already posted on bitcointalk, then I can't see too much trouble in consolidating it into one place. My worry was that you were using outside sources of information to bring new information onto the forum in order to "expose" them, personally.

He challenged me to post more.

I would encourage you not to play petty games with the person you are attempting to make a scam accusation against. If they challenge you to other nonsensical mundane tasks would you be interested in doing those as well? I have some yard-work that might need doing. If it is not relevant to strengthening or making the case for your accusation then it does not belong in this thread. That would seem to be common sense, in my book.

None of the referral links work anymore - they are to dead ponzi scams.

I probably have some dead links to ponzi scams out there that tricked me into thinking they were legitimate companies. This is not conclusive that they were knowingly promoting a ponzi or scam. Sometimes you just don't know any better and get taken for a ride. We live and we learn.

Running and participating in ponzi scams is illegal in a lot of jurisdictions.

Was he running a ponzi scam? It sounds more like he was trying to make some goofy marketing opportunity work and it turned out to not be all that he bargained for. I'm not defending their actions, but based on the evidence you've presented I don't see much to suggest malice or intent.

I'm dyslexic - so spelling is a challenge.

I'm mostly just messing around, but realistically every browser has a spell-check these days. There's a lot of ways to check if you are putting out mistakes and correct them before the world gets their hands on it.

[xtraelv]

None of the referral links work anymore - they are to dead ponzi scams.

I probably have some dead links to ponzi scams out there that tricked me into thinking they were legitimate companies. This is not conclusive that they were knowingly promoting a ponzi or scam. Sometimes you just don't know any better and get taken for a ride. We live and we learn.

Running and participating in ponzi scams is illegal in a lot of jurisdictions.

Was he running a ponzi scam? It sounds more like he was trying to make some goofy marketing opportunity work and it turned out to not be all that he bargained for. I'm not defending their actions, but based on the evidence you've presented I don't see much to suggest malice or intent.

He is an active promoter of multiple ponzis over a number of years with thousands of downstream recruits.

I've taken your comment on board and to ensure not to even accidentally breaking a rule have moved the claims unrelated to the start of the thread to another board where private information is allowed to be posted. But yeah - all the info so far was sourced from Bitcointalk so there is nothing new. It is better consolidated there - it was getting a bit messy.

https://plus.google.com/+CryptoPassiveIncome/posts/XNW1sA4VGNi
Explains it in his own words.
Some of the thread has moved to here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4221113.msg38397225#msg38397225