Bitcoin Forum
March 30, 2024, 07:32:32 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they believe that the creator of this topic displays some red flags which make them high-risk. (Login to see the detailed trust ratings.) While the bitcointalk.org administration does not verify such claims, you should proceed with extreme caution.
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: marlboroza - about the red trust - Nel.network fake team  (Read 2093 times)
marlboroza
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 2270


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 04:59:06 PM
 #61

I don't think posting a disclaimer should be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any and all scams and shadiness. What if I posted an account sale with a disclaimer that said "I am only hosting this sale, am not involved in the sale, don't endorse this sale, and won't be held liable for this sale"? What if I hosted a Bitcoin Doubler with a similar disclaimer?
There is really no need to appeal to the extremes. I'm sure that you've understood what I meant.
I don't.

Why is this extreme?

Someone accepted to run campaign for investment fraud - and they have disclaimer. Why is this different than anything else with disclaimer?

Crossposting:
A BM has nothing to do with investors, nor is he/she required to do their due diligence. Accepting a project =/= endorsement =/= guaranteed/expected high returns. We aren't going to censor projects based on potential returns now, are we?

Are they required to do due diligence or not?
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
Be very wary of relying on JavaScript for security on crypto sites. The site can change the JavaScript at any time unless you take unusual precautions, and browsers are not generally known for their airtight security.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
1711783952
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711783952

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711783952
Reply with quote  #2

1711783952
Report to moderator
Ludji
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 5


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 05:04:07 PM
 #62

Apologies. Not my intention, and I accept a disclaimer is fine when the project wasn't obviously a scam.

What are you even talking about here? Obviously, he didn't take the job knowing it's a scam(I hope). Disclaimers are not enough, in no line of business is working with scam projects legal, knowingly or unknowingly. Everybody should do their own due diligence if they are putting their name and reputation on the thread. Disclaimers mean shit when you're getting paid for it.


Taking this case again as an example, however - the first project he was promoting was an obvious ponzi. A disclaimer should not be enough to absolve all responsibility. People have been tagged for joining a ponzi signature campaign - I fail to see how we can't then tag someone for running one.

Here you're back on track. Most of the scams are obvious to people who do the research and especially to experienced bounty managers.

By the way, stop being bullied into an opinion by higher ranking members. You were right and there was no need to apologize, extreme or not, your example was spot on. Scams are scams, be they elaborate or simple.


Looking for Reddit accounts? Well look no further, HIGH-QUALITY REDDIT ACCOUNTS FOR SALE: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4960485.0
The Sceptical Chymist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3290
Merit: 6766


Proudly Cycling Merits for Foxpup


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 05:12:18 PM
 #63

By the way, stop being bullied into an opinion by higher ranking members.
I don't think marlboroza is being bullied and I for one respect his decisions, even if I don't agree wholeheartedly with them.  I don't think anyone is screaming at him to reverse his feedback, simply disagreeing with him.  Members here are on both sides of the fence when it comes to this issue, and I think both sides need to be heard.  

I wouldn't suggest marlboroza remove any feedback he left, nor would I counter it in a case like this.  Not all DT members agree with one another.  Oftentimes there are issues nobody can reach a consensus on, but it's not bullying to express an opinion.

I was talking about o_e_l_e_o changing his statement after Lauda's post.
My bad.  He's not getting bullied either, though.  He's just being polite.

..JAMBLER.io..Create Your Bitcoin Mixing
Business Now for   F R E E 
▄█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
████▀████████████████████
███▀█████▄█▀███▀▀▀██████
██▀█████▄█▄██████████████
██▄▄████▀▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▄▄██████
█████▄▄▄██████████▀▄████
█████▀▄█▄██████▀█▄█████
███████▀▄█▀█▄██▀█▄███████
█████████▄█▀▄█▀▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
      OUR      
PARTNERS

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
▄█████████████████████████████
████████▀▀█████▀▀████████
█████▀█████████████▀█████
████████████████████████
███████████████▄█████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
███████████████▀█████████
████████████████████████
█████▄█████████████▄█████
████████▄▄█████▄▄████████
▀█████████████████████████████
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
.
   INVEST   
BITCOIN

.
█████████████████████████████████████████████████
████▄
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
████▀
Ludji
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 5


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 05:16:06 PM
 #64

I don't think marlboroza is being bullied and I for one respect his decisions, even if I don't agree wholeheartedly with them.  I don't think anyone is screaming at him to reverse his feedback, simply disagreeing with him.  Members here are on both sides of the fence when it comes to this issue, and I think both sides need to be heard.  

I wouldn't suggest marlboroza remove any feedback he left, nor would I counter it in a case like this.  Not all DT members agree with one another.  Oftentimes there are issues nobody can reach a consensus on, but it's not bullying to express an opinion.

I was talking about o_e_l_e_o changing his statement after Lauda's post.

Quote
I don't think posting a disclaimer should be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any and all scams and shadiness.

Quote
There is really no need to appeal to the extremes. I'm sure that you've understood what I meant.

Quote
Apologies. Not my intention, and I accept a disclaimer is fine when the project wasn't obviously a scam.

Looking for Reddit accounts? Well look no further, HIGH-QUALITY REDDIT ACCOUNTS FOR SALE: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4960485.0
endlasuresh
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 103


View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 05:18:17 PM
 #65

I think becoz he and jamal were ALU's competitors.
2018-07-03. Doesn't surprise me from a chronic liar.
Can you provide proof where he lied to you? I have seen all the time lies from you even in this thread.
A bounty manager should stop scammers by locking thread, although how about your friend Wapinter scammer and aTriz?

Oh dear lord.

We are discussing an important issue here - can we please not derail it with personal vendettas?



They aren't, especially not legally. That's what a disclaimer is for.

BM's can't hide behind disclaimers.
They can and they will.

I don't think posting a disclaimer should be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any and all scams and shadiness. What if I posted an account sale with a disclaimer that said "I am only hosting this sale, am not involved in the sale, don't endorse this sale, and won't be held liable for this sale"? What if I hosted a Bitcoin Doubler with a similar disclaimer?

As I mentioned, I don't expect BMs to be infallible, but they should be able to avoid ponzi and obvious scams with minimal research.
OK Boss, Since you had met most time in the threads.
Please make decision for Bounty managers and Scam Managers. I will be waiting for your answer after 5 days.

Discuss more with BM's

For Telugu Translation Contact to me
yogg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464
Merit: 3158



View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 05:37:22 PM
Last edit: September 15, 2018, 05:47:38 PM by yogg
 #66

I was talking about o_e_l_e_o changing his statement after Lauda's post.

Quote
I don't think posting a disclaimer should be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any and all scams and shadiness.

Quote
There is really no need to appeal to the extremes. I'm sure that you've understood what I meant.

Quote
Apologies. Not my intention, and I accept a disclaimer is fine when the project wasn't obviously a scam.

Can you please explain how to prevent an edit function from being used by the team running the project ?
Other than, having to check every other social media page they advertise, on a daily basis, consistently, during the whole life of the bounty ?
And make sure this is still legit. Can you just estimate the time this would take ?

As far as I'm concerned, BM aren't responsible for the teams actions.
Were the agencies used by Madoff to advertise sentenced to anything ? No.
These topics weren't even brought on during trials.
Hey hey heeeyy.. what about Carlos ?

We take all your criticism, but what are you recommend ?
Of course, a disclaimer isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card, but there must be a right balance between immunity and blatant thievery. Where is it, in your opinion ?
Ludji
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 5


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 05:51:57 PM
Last edit: September 15, 2018, 06:02:55 PM by Ludji
 #67


Can you please explain how to prevent an edit function from being used by the team running the project ?
Other than, having to check every other social media page they advertise, on a daily basis, consistently, during the whole life of the bounty ?
And make sure this is still legit. Can you just estimate the time this would take ?

We take all your criticism, but what are you recommend ?

Afaic, BM aren't responsible for the teams actions.
Were the agencies used by Madoff to advertised sentenced to anything ? No.
These topics weren't even brought on during trials.

First of all, my recommendation has been the same from the start of this thread. Bounty Managers have to accept responsibility for their actions. They are getting paid to manage bounty campaigns and they should do their due diligence on who they are working for.  Projects that don't pass the test can manage their own bounty from their own account(which is usually new, low ranking, no rep - since they don't deserve to have the reputation of an established bounty manager tied to their project.

Secondly, I won't even address the fact that you compare a 65 billion dollar scam to wanna-be ICO scams. Madoff managed to scam auditors who do checks for scams, false records, manipulation for a living, as well as the SEC. Compare that to barely literate ICO scams with fake teams behind them and yeah... you get the point.

Looking for Reddit accounts? Well look no further, HIGH-QUALITY REDDIT ACCOUNTS FOR SALE: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4960485.0
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 05:52:15 PM
Last edit: September 15, 2018, 06:03:44 PM by Lauda
 #68

Why is this extreme?

Someone accepted to run campaign for investment fraud - and they have disclaimer. Why is this different than anything else with disclaimer?
The example was a clear appeal to extremes. Get a hold of yourself; the above conjecture is just pure silliness.

Crossposting:
A BM has nothing to do with investors, nor is he/she required to do their due diligence. Accepting a project =/= endorsement =/= guaranteed/expected high returns. We aren't going to censor projects based on potential returns now, are we?
Are they required to do due diligence or not?
They are not[1][2], the same way that no hunter nor investor is required to do this. Whether they should or should not do it is another thing.

Afaic, BM aren't responsible for the teams actions.
Were the agencies used by Madoff to advertised sentenced to anything ? No.
These topics weren't even brought on during trials.
Correct, because nobody sane would go after a subset of the victim pool.

I don't think marlboroza is being bullied and I for one respect his decisions, even if I don't agree wholeheartedly with them.  I don't think anyone is screaming at him to reverse his feedback, simply disagreeing with him.  Members here are on both sides of the fence when it comes to this issue, and I think both sides need to be heard.  
"Disagreeing with someone's opinion == bullying someone" is your classic liberal, whiny bullshit. There are plenty of disagreements among DT members (including child-and-parent DT positions), and that is fine.

[1] They might be if we collectively go on a power-trip. Smiley
[2] This doesn't mean you should promote this as a valid project. <- another example of appealing to extremes.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
yogg
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464
Merit: 3158



View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 06:07:34 PM
 #69

Secondly, I won't even address the fact that you compare a 65 billion dollar scam to wanna-be ICO scams. Madoff managed to scam auditors who do checks for scams, false records, manipulation for a living. Compare that to have literate ICO scams and yeah... you get the point.

Thank you actually for elaborating my point.

The scammer was sentenced for over a century in jail, yeah.
What about the scam agents ? And this is state justice, not some internet board with "wanna-be ICOs", like you say.
Which one is the most "critical" ? Were there consequences for the agents ?

Now that you repeated that, in your view, managers have responsability, can you please address my first point ?
What do you recommend to do this ? Let's find practical solutions that BMs can use.
How can managers protect themselves from a team that appears legit at first glance, with only a page on 2 different social networks at start.
Only then, they add more and more bullshit, make Linkedin plagiarised profiles, and update the project OP (that has been accepted by the manager) since they can do that.

Except from checking the whole marketing of every project that is managed on a daily basis to prevent scams, which would take forever, what do you recommend ?

I have no better solution to provide, this is why I think they shouldn't be held responsible. But meh.. difference in points of view etc ...
Since you think otherwise, what do you recommend, practically ?
Ludji
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 5


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 06:25:21 PM
Last edit: September 15, 2018, 06:50:49 PM by Ludji
 #70

Thank you actually for elaborating my point.

The scammer was sentenced for over a century in jail, yeah.
What about the scam agents ? And this is state justice, not some internet board with "wanna-be ICOs", like you say.
Which one is the most "critical" ? Were there consequences for the agents ?

Now that you repeated that, in your view, managers have responsability, can you please address my first point ?
What do you recommend to do this ? Let's find practical solutions that BMs can use.
How can managers protect themselves from a team that appears legit at first glance, with only a page on 2 different social networks at start.
Only then, they add more and more bullshit, make Linkedin plagiarised profiles, and update the project OP (that has been accepted by the manager) since they can do that.

Except from checking the whole marketing of every project that is managed on a daily basis to prevent scams, which would take forever, what do you recommend ?

I have no better solution to provide, this is why I think they shouldn't be responsible. But meh.. difference in points of view etc ...
Since you think otherwise, what do you recommend, practically ?

Scam agents? If you mean auditors, they helped build the case and got a reduced sentence. You can also bet they got a hefty fine and can't do business in the branch anymore.

Still, it's beyond me how you can use Madoff as an example and how you can compare a business that operated for decades before being exposed to these scam ICOs. Also, one important thing you fail to realise, we are talking about the reputation of a member, not about banning him from the forum. All of the Madoff employees and partners(since you're using them as an example) do have a bad reputation after the scandal, wouldn't you say so? Would you hire someone that worked with them? Would you like to know whether a person worked for Madoff before hiring him? Would you like a warning before conducting business with that person? If the answer is yes, then congratulations, you see my point.

Nobody is holding you back, you can work with Woshib all you like, but other users deserve a warning in the form of red trust and reference.

Regarding your question, a project with "a page or two on social media" shouldn't be launching an ICO now, should it? There is no need to check the "whole marketing" as you put it, just check the team behind it and whether the project lies on their website(which it often does), simple as that. They should protect themselves by doing the research since it would be the best course of action for both their reputation and the well-being of the investors.

Looking for Reddit accounts? Well look no further, HIGH-QUALITY REDDIT ACCOUNTS FOR SALE: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4960485.0
o_e_l_e_o
In memoriam
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2268
Merit: 18497


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 06:59:38 PM
 #71

I was talking about o_e_l_e_o changing his statement after Lauda's post.

Except I didn't. My first statement was (emphasis added):

I don't think posting a disclaimer should be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any and all scams and shadiness.

As I mentioned, I don't expect BMs to be infallible, but they should be able to avoid ponzi and obvious scams with minimal research.

My second statement was (emphasis added):

I accept a disclaimer is fine when the project wasn't obviously a scam.

These two statements are entirely compatible. Allow me to elaborate.

Most scams are obvious. Some are ponzis, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of reading their website. Some have fake teams, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of looking at LinkedIn. Some are plagiarized, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of reading their whitepaper. If a scam is this obvious, then a disclaimer shouldn't be enough to absolve a manager of all responsibility. They should be doing a minimum level of research. If they promote such an obvious scam, they should be tagged.

Some scams are not obvious. Take Bitconnect for example. Bitconnect fooled a lot of people for a long time, and they made millions. I don't think you can blame a manager for being involved with a project they didn't know was a scam when no one else knew either or it couldn't be reasonably exposed. In those cases, provided they break off all ties once the scam is exposed, a disclaimer is fine and they shouldn't be tagged.

I would echo that disagreement does not equal bullying
Ludji
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 5


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 07:14:00 PM
 #72

These two statements are entirely compatible. Allow me to elaborate.

Most scams are obvious. Some are ponzis, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of reading their website. Some have fake teams, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of looking at LinkedIn. Some are plagiarized, which can be discovered in 5 minutes of reading their whitepaper. If a scam is this obvious, then a disclaimer shouldn't be enough to absolve a manager of all responsibility. They should be doing a minimum level of research. If they promote such an obvious scam, they should be tagged.

Some scams are not obvious. Take Bitconnect for example. Bitconnect fooled a lot of people for a long time, and they made millions. I don't think you can blame a manager for being involved with a project they didn't know was a scam when no one else knew either or it couldn't be reasonably exposed. In those cases, provided they break off all ties once the scam is exposed, a disclaimer is fine and they shouldn't be tagged.

I would echo that disagreement does not equal bullying

Ponzis are just a form of fraud. New investors are paid by the money of the old ones. The moment new investors stop coming in the chain breaks and the owners make a run for it. Bitcoinnect was literally the definition of a ponzi scheme and it wasn't at all hard to realize that since there are countless examples like it. 

I may have expressed myself wrong, a better way to say what I meant was stop being influenced by an opinion of a higher ranking member. If you were not influenced I apologize, although it seemed to me like you were and without a need for it since you are in the right while the other user is clearly in the wrong although they won't admit it.

Looking for Reddit accounts? Well look no further, HIGH-QUALITY REDDIT ACCOUNTS FOR SALE: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4960485.0
marlboroza
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 2270


View Profile
September 15, 2018, 07:22:04 PM
 #73

~
https://www.silvermillerlaw.com/current-investigations/bitconnect/
https://www.silvermillerlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/2018-7-3-DE-48-THIRD-AMENDED-CLASS-ACTION-COMPLAINT.pdf

You will get to youtube part in second link(and people who advertised it on youtube)

According to youtube's ToS:

Quote
7.1 As a YouTube account holder you may submit Content. You understand that whether or not Content is published, YouTube does not guarantee any confidentiality with respect to Content.

7.2 You retain all of your ownership rights in your Content, but you are required to grant limited licence rights to YouTube and other users of the Service. These are described in paragraph 8 of these Terms (Rights you licence).

7.3 You understand and agree that you are solely responsible for your own Content and the consequences of posting or publishing it. YouTube does not endorse any Content or any opinion, recommendation, or advice expressed therein, and YouTube expressly disclaims any and all liability in connection with Content.

The same can apply to twitter promoters, facebook promoters - that is why social media is banning crypto advertising, they don't want to  face law suit because of actions of other people.

You see, when it comes to trial, disclaimer really means nothing.

Ok, I see your point about bounty managers don't have to do due diligence - you are right about this, they don't.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 07:34:30 PM
Merited by yogg (1)
 #74

Last time I checked, bounty managers are not the ICO's partners and thus partnership law doesn't apply.



You see, when it comes to trial, disclaimer really means nothing.
Disclaimers absolutely mean a lot. You just cherry-picked something that suited the argument. You can do the same with FTC regulations on endorsements to support the counter argument. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Anyhow, this is just a lawsuit. The outcome is TBD.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3640
Merit: 8906


https://bpip.org


View Profile WWW
September 15, 2018, 11:13:48 PM
 #75

Were the agencies used by Madoff to advertise sentenced to anything ? No.

This is, in Lauda's words, an extreme example. A more appropriate one would be this: is it ok (or even legal) for an ad agency to put up highway billboards promoting criminal activities, and how should we react if someone chooses to publicly shame that ad agency for such actions?

Nobody's getting sentenced here. Marlboroza has expressed a strong opinion, which this forum sorely needs on the account of it drowning in this ICO sewage. And if bounty managers figure it's worth spending 30 minutes on due diligence to avoid getting tagged by marlboroza then more power to them. I also hope they would spend another 5 minutes posting negative findings publicly.
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2018, 04:41:25 AM
 #76

Were the agencies used by Madoff to advertise sentenced to anything ? No.
This is, in Lauda's words, an extreme example. A more appropriate one would be this: is it ok (or even legal) for an ad agency to put up highway billboards promoting criminal activities, and how should we react if someone chooses to publicly shame that ad agency for such actions?
What do you mean with promoting criminal activities?

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
The Cryptovator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 2165


Need PR/CMC & CG? TG @The_Cryptovator


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2018, 05:28:06 AM
Last edit: September 16, 2018, 05:40:38 AM by Coolcryptovator
 #77

Question to Lauda,
User Mocoinaire posted 2 ANN lately with fake team.[1][2].
Please take a look on accusation.
 1. Debreco - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5008893.0
 2. Giantnova - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5029777.0

No one tagged him/her for first project or not yet tag him still now. Recently we found another ANN with fake team.
If I say he is involved with both project how you will prove me wrong in fact he/she have own ICO LAUNCH SERVICES.
Can you prove me wrong ? Even though we know he/she isn't involved but question is why he/she posting ANN continuously with fake team and still never locked thread even exposed.

And what's your opinion about this kind of user? We should leave them to bring more scammer . We should believe them them who use fake team from stock or Google and who plagiarized content & whitpaper ?



Personally I think I should open poll on meta instead of argument, we should know others people opinion about corrupted BM or ANN poster. If similar case I mean multiple case they should tagged or not.

.BEST..CHANGE.███████████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████████
..BUY/ SELL CRYPTO..
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2018, 05:43:17 AM
 #78

If I say he is involved with both project how you will prove me wrong in fact he/she have own ICO LAUNCH SERVICES.
Can you prove me wrong ?
Prove what wrong, your suspicion of guilt?

Even though we know he/she isn't involved but question is why he/she posting ANN continuously with fake team and still never locked thread even exposed.
And what's your opinion about this kind of user? We should leave them to bring more scammer . We should believe them them who use fake team from stock or Google and who plagiarized content & whitpaper ?
There is a huge difference between thread posters which act as soon as they are notified, those that delay acting as long as possible, and those that act upon reading. In this case, the user is guilty for not acting post exposure.

Personally I think I should open poll on meta instead of argument, we should know others people opinion about corrupted BM or ANN poster. If similar case I mean multiple case they should tagged or not.
Step 1: Get 100 accounts.
Step 2: Win poll.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
The Cryptovator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2198
Merit: 2165


Need PR/CMC & CG? TG @The_Cryptovator


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2018, 06:08:00 AM
 #79

If I say he is involved with both project how you will prove me wrong in fact he/she have own ICO LAUNCH SERVICES.
Can you prove me wrong ?

Prove what wrong, your suspicion of guilt?

Exactly.

Even though we know he/she isn't involved but question is why he/she posting ANN continuously with fake team and still never locked thread even exposed.
And what's your opinion about this kind of user? We should leave them to bring more scammer . We should believe them them who use fake team from stock or Google and who plagiarized content & whitpaper ?
There is a huge difference between thread posters which act as soon as they are notified, those that delay acting as long as possible, and those that act upon reading. In this case, the user is guilty for not acting post exposure.

Obviously exposer already notified him on his OP by reply scam warning. Than why he shouldn't tag ?

 
Personally I think I should open poll on meta instead of argument, we should know others people opinion about corrupted BM or ANN poster. If similar case I mean multiple case they should tagged or not.
Step 1: Get 100 accounts.
Step 2: Win poll.

I don't think it's necesarry.

.BEST..CHANGE.███████████████
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
███████████████
..BUY/ SELL CRYPTO..
Lauda
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965


Terminated.


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2018, 06:13:10 AM
 #80

If I say he is involved with both project how you will prove me wrong in fact he/she have own ICO LAUNCH SERVICES.
Can you prove me wrong ?
Prove what wrong, your suspicion of guilt?
Exactly.
I don't need to prove wrong any suspicion. That is a weird question.


Even though we know he/she isn't involved but question is why he/she posting ANN continuously with fake team and still never locked thread even exposed.
And what's your opinion about this kind of user? We should leave them to bring more scammer . We should believe them them who use fake team from stock or Google and who plagiarized content & whitpaper ?
There is a huge difference between thread posters which act as soon as they are notified, those that delay acting as long as possible, and those that act upon reading. In this case, the user is guilty for not acting post exposure.
Obviously exposer already notified him on his OP by reply scam warning. Than why he shouldn't tag ?
Who said he shouldn't be tagged for failing to act?

Personally I think I should open poll on meta instead of argument, we should know others people opinion about corrupted BM or ANN poster. If similar case I mean multiple case they should tagged or not.
Step 1: Get 100 accounts.
Step 2: Win poll.
I don't think it's necesarry.
Point being: Polls are easily cheated and present a useless metric. You don't want random farmers to decide on forum policies.

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
😼 Bitcoin Core (onion)
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!