[Guide] Dogie's Comprehensive Manufacturer Trustworthiness Guide [1st Feb 2016]

[Bicknellski]

Why does Marto think he is going to get away with his long running scam?

Dear Customer,
Sorry for the delays.
We'll catch up with all the orders within this friday
Regards,
Customer service

When tomorrow morning did not receive the tracking number does not even try to write some excuses ...
Last chance to deal fairly with us

Order Reference DIFSRTQII -- placed on 2014-12-21
I don't need the miners, I need the money

Refunds... obviously not rated properly.

Marto's trust rating -155 and dropping. What more is required Dogie?

[dogie]

Marto's trust rating -155 and dropping. What more is required Dogie?

An update cycle.

[Ermak]

Hi Dogie's, this is scam or not? (www.minerslab.com  https://www.achilleslabs.com aryadutaminer.com ) really need advice I want to buy  .

[Zich]

Hi Dogie's, this is scam or not? (www.minerslab.com  https://www.achilleslabs.com aryadutaminer.com ) really need advice I want to buy  .

Obviously scammer

[dogie]

Hi Dogie's, this is scam or not? (www.minerslab.com  https://www.achilleslabs.com aryadutaminer.com ) really need advice I want to buy  .

Obviously scammer

The first two both have threads on here, both suggesting they're scams.

[TheRealSteve]

And the third one (aryaduta) is selling the same photoshopped malarkey as this outfit: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=960060

[dogie]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

[marto74]

Gratz Dogie.
Now Bick is going to like you for sure


Best Martin

[dogie]

Gratz Dogie. Now Bick is going to like you for sure

Bick hates me regardless of what I do, I didn't invest in his company so now I'm a fraud.

[Guy Corem]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

[Guy Corem]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

[dogie]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

Don't get started on this again, we've been through this a billion times before. You're more likely to pick up an ethical infraction than have the preorder category prematurely changed.

[Guy Corem]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

Don't get started on this again, we've been through this a billion times before. You're more likely to pick up an ethical infraction than have the preorder category prematurely changed.

Everytime you'll wrongly score us I'll post about it.
I don't understand the rest of your comment.

[dogie]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

Don't get started on this again, we've been through this a billion times before. You're more likely to pick up an ethical infraction than have the preorder category prematurely changed.

Everytime you'll wrongly score us I'll post about it.
I don't understand the rest of your comment.

First part:
Nothing has changed since last time and it was discussed in detail then. The criteria for going to "No" was set out and you have not yet fulfilled it, and neither has BFL. Therefore the score remains the same until you release gen 2.
Second part:
I can't discuss it in public unless you void my NDA. I hate NDA's, I'm never signing one again in that form.

[Guy Corem]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

Don't get started on this again, we've been through this a billion times before. You're more likely to pick up an ethical infraction than have the preorder category prematurely changed.

Everytime you'll wrongly score us I'll post about it.
I don't understand the rest of your comment.

He is (implying a )threat you that if you keep asking about it he will lower your score on ethical. (Kinda shitty dogie, how about ethical stay based on how they treat customers and not how they post in your threads?)

I'll keep posting about it. I need to explain, few times a week that we have the miners in stock and they're ready to be shipped immediately. He knows about it and still keep the bogus marking.

[Guy Corem]

Updated to February 2015, lots of changes (see the notes here).

And again you unjustifiably mark as us with pre-orders.

It does seem a bit unfair, when Bitmain used pre-orders on the L1 and ethics for their hashnest price spikes when the btc prices raises.

It's true that BMT used pre-orders more recently than us, but I'm protesting OUR unjustifiable mark for the last 3 months.
Customers are getting WRONG data and we need to explain this BS to a lot of worried customers.

Don't get started on this again, we've been through this a billion times before. You're more likely to pick up an ethical infraction than have the preorder category prematurely changed.

Everytime you'll wrongly score us I'll post about it.
I don't understand the rest of your comment.

First part:
Nothing has changed since last time and it was discussed in detail then. The criteria for going to "No" was set out and you have not yet fulfilled it, and neither has BFL. Therefore the score remains the same until you release gen 2.
Second part:
I can't discuss it in public unless you void my NDA. I hate NDA's, I'm never signing one again in that form.

Thank you for the comparison.
It's gen3, not gen2.

[dogie]

He is (implying a )threat you that if you keep asking about it he will lower your score on ethical. (Kinda shitty dogie, how about ethical stay based on how they treat customers and not how they post in your threads?)

That's not what I'm saying or implying. Refer you back to the NDA part and why I can't explain what I'm actually talking about in public.

Thank you for thw comparison.
It's gen3, not gen2.

You both have a transitional rating in that category, that's not saying you are BFL.

[jimmothy]

Guy you're wasting your time. Unless you pay Dogie, he's not going to give you the same preferential treatment as Bitmain.

[dogie]

Guy you're wasting your time. Unless you pay Dogie, he's not going to give you the same preferential treatment as Bitmain.

And I provided preferential treatment how?

He is (implying a )threat you that if you keep asking about it he will lower your score on ethical. (Kinda shitty dogie, how about ethical stay based on how they treat customers and not how they post in your threads?)

That's not what I'm saying or implying. Refer you back to the NDA part and why I can't explain what I'm actually talking about in public.

Says more than I can figure.

No idea what that means

[dogie]

Guy you're wasting your time. Unless you pay Dogie, he's not going to give you the same preferential treatment as Bitmain.

And I provided preferential treatment how?

He is (implying a )threat you that if you keep asking about it he will lower your score on ethical. (Kinda shitty dogie, how about ethical stay based on how they treat customers and not how they post in your threads?)

That's not what I'm saying or implying. Refer you back to the NDA part and why I can't explain what I'm actually talking about in public.

Says more than I can figure.

No idea what that means

What it means is that you've set up NDA's about ratings and they're affecting what you can or do, since I have no more information than that just saying you have an NDA says more than I can figure. It could mean you're giving special treatment or they did wrong shit and you can't say it but I have no clue because you signed paperwork.

Ah right. tldr:

1) Guy made me sign an NDA, something I did so I could get the full information on why their preorder of SP30 went south in order to fairly rate them.
2) Unfortunately, that NDA has no expiry time nor any reasonable basis for me to break it.
3) That means that I can't release information on detailed explanations of some ratings without adding liability due to the presence of that NDA.

I would happily void that NDA if Guy would allow it, but I highly doubt he will.