The Pharmacist,actmyname,Vod.. The mafia trying to get controll of bitcointalk ?

[lotfiuser]

so i just got red trust cuz i did a mistake i was trying to sell my steam account or getting collateral on it on the same time and they called me a scammer and refused to remove  there negative feedback from a mistake that i didnt back in 2016

User   Date   Risked BTC amount   Reference   Comments
The Pharmacist   2018-04-11   0.00000000   Reference   This user is one of the worst on bitcointalk. Was caught scamming with a loan request, then gives multiple retaliatory feedbacks on trusted users, and now is spamming nonsense in sig campaign threads about how unfair the rules are. I do not trust this user and he should NEVER be allowed in a sig campaign.
actmyname   2018-01-01   0.00000000   Reference   Asked for a loan with collateral they were trying to sell.

Also sent retaliatory feedback with no substance.
Vod   2016-08-14   0.00000000   Reference   Asking for a $150 "loan" using collateral he is actually trying to sell. See Reference.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam
and you can check it by your self

[1714946256]

1714946256

[S_Therapist]

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam

Do you know Wapintar, Needmoney, Woshib, Wipro? I can't list more right now. They have been red-tagged from managing scam bounty. You can check their profile. No matter who is s/he, if someone abuses the system, s/he will get negative feedback. That's it.
If you have enough proof that they are biased to any bounty manager, why don't you create thread with proof? I believe that they will be removed by DT 1.

[xtraelv]

so i just got red trust cuz i did a mistake i was trying to sell my steam account or getting collateral on it on the same time and they called me a scammer and refused to remove  there negative feedback from a mistake that i didnt back in 2016

User   Date   Risked BTC amount   Reference   Comments
The Pharmacist   2018-04-11   0.00000000   Reference   This user is one of the worst on bitcointalk. Was caught scamming with a loan request, then gives multiple retaliatory feedbacks on trusted users, and now is spamming nonsense in sig campaign threads about how unfair the rules are. I do not trust this user and he should NEVER be allowed in a sig campaign.
actmyname   2018-01-01   0.00000000   Reference   Asked for a loan with collateral they were trying to sell.

Also sent retaliatory feedback with no substance.
Vod   2016-08-14   0.00000000   Reference   Asking for a $150 "loan" using collateral he is actually trying to sell. See Reference.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam
and you can check it by your self

Blame the people that demanded Lauda to be removed from DT.

I'm assuming that because Laudas trust no longer shows as default others are tagging people that used to be tagged by Lauda.

Trying to get a bigger loan than the collateral is worth and trying to sell the collateral at the same time looks very scammy.

It looks like you either are trying to get more than it is worth and default on the loan (leaving the lower valued collateral) or to get paid for the same thing twice.

You posted this thread in the wrong forum - it should be in reputation.

[Steamtyme]

Op Stop multi- posting, there is an edit button for a reason.

I'm assuming that because Laudas trust no longer shows as default others are tagging people that used to be tagged by Lauda.

The feedback was left months, and in Vods case years ago.

The fact is simple, at some point you did something they deem untrustworthy. That's the system in place. It doesn't really prevent you from using the forum, but gives people a heads up that there may be circumstances they should look into/ask about before trading with you. I can't speak for them, but all you can do is try to rebuild the reputation and then ask for it to be removed; doubtful but you never know.

Generally only have to explain this to newbies.

[lotfiuser]

its about me anymore yesterday I was browsing I asked them to remove their feedback and they act like very strict then i think what about managers that run scam project did they do same thing so i checked there sent feedback and there was none

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I'm assuming that because Laudas trust no longer shows as default others are tagging people that used to be tagged by Lauda.

Not in this case, but that whole issue has become an annoyance for marlboroza and actmyname (and anyone else who stepped up and re-tagged whoever Lauda gave negs to), I'm sure.  

Apparently OP deleted his post in the reference thread I left in my feedback on him, though whatever he had written was only one example of how annoying and untrustworthy he seems.  

i asked them multiple time to remove there feedback but they allways refusing

That's because you haven't done anything which would justify removing your trust.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam

That's an unsubstantiated accusation, and this is a great reason why people don't trust you.  I recently negged both Lightlord and Lutpin for not paying their 777Coin and Bitvest campaign participants and leaving them hanging with no communication for over 10 weeks--I did remove the feedback once they finally paid, but if you think I'd be hesitant to tag a scammy bounty manager you're out of your mind. 

I actually think I've tagged at least one of them who got caught cheating with alts in the bounty he was managing.  Can't remember his name off the top of my head, and I'm too lazy to look through the hundreds of feedbacks I've left, but if anyone has the patience and the time, feel free to do so.

[Steamtyme]

Still multiposting

Apparently OP deleted his post in the reference thread I left in my feedback on him, though whatever he had written was only one example of how annoying and untrustworthy he seems. 

They did but there is one on page 19, where they are already complaining about the requirements... and getting them wrong. I poked around a bit because I know your feedback generally has a legit reference to it.

lol this rules are reallly hard Must make 25 posts per week + the user have to earn merit weekly and if he got negative trust he will be removed   thats just a signature campagne to earn 40 $ / week thats not 1k$ per week

and btw its not about me anymore i just think that there is something fishy here maybe another one confirm it

Nothing fishy each DT has his or her reasons for tagging people. Some specialize in hunting down scam Ico's and their promoters. Some just catch the random passerby doing things they consider untrustworthy. That would explain why you aren't seeing the "rainbow of reasons for tagging" that you are expecting.

[The Cryptovator]

so i just got red trust cuz i did a mistake i was trying to sell my steam account or getting collateral on it on the same time and they called me a scammer and refused to remove  there negative feedback from a mistake that i didnt back in 2016

You are self admitted that you did a mistake. And obviously they have tagged your for your mistake. They have commented almost same, you are trying to sale collateral.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam  

We will glad to know who is this managers. Make a list with proof and submit on Scam Accusation board. I have caught multiple case about Scam ICO,s and they have tagged. So if you have list than post it. On the other hand if you have proof DT are getting paid from ICO due to not tagging than show us proof. You can't claim without proof. Obviously you are lying since you don't have evidence.

[shield132]

Op Stop multi- posting, there is an edit button for a reason.

I'm assuming that because Laudas trust no longer shows as default others are tagging people that used to be tagged by Lauda.

The feedback was left months, and in Vods case years ago.

The fact is simple, at some point you did something they deem untrustworthy. That's the system in place. It doesn't really prevent you from using the forum, but gives people a heads up that there may be circumstances they should look into/ask about before trading with you. I can't speak for them, but all you can do is try to rebuild the reputation and then ask for it to be removed; doubtful but you never know.

Generally only have to explain this to newbies.

if i use steam account as collateral the guy who take it he will change email and password so I can't sell it if I already use it as collateral -_-
and btw its not about me anymore i just think that there is something fishy here maybe another one confirm it

It's another task when you give your collater to lender in order to gain trust and receive funds from him/her and it's another - when you try to get rid of (sell) your collateral by taking loan and then going away. If you still didn't understand, then imagine this: I own one thing that's hard to sell and worths 100$, then I offer lender this thing as collateral and request 120$ from him/her. I get money, he/she gets collateral, then I refuse to pay, apologise for this and write him/her: I gave you collateral, sell it to cover money which I had to pay but suddenlyvwas unable to pay back.
Is it so hard to understand?

[InvoKing]

Still multiposting

Same comment. People has been banned for burst posting and since trust isn't moderated better to move the topic to reputation imo since it has nothing to do with meta.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

~snip~

The mafia, lol! They help this forum to be a better one. What happens here is that people like you play the victim role but it doesn’t work. We get victim stories every day, but we don’t believe them.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam and you can check it by your self

It is recommended not to post while drunk.

[YOSHIE]

I have little opinion that there is no intention to corner who is right and wrong?
I just gave a little view of the accusation?
Whether it's true or false, I see: (Pharmacist), (actmyname), (Vod). not (Mafia) as you accuse! he works according to the rules of the forum, this person has a special team with different tasks.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam
and you can check it by your self

I give an example:

[Lauda]

[][OgNasty][][Reference][][Escrow funds weren't held transparently, no accounting for transfers, allegedly moving funds to an exchange without investor knowledge, & when questioned refuses to divulge requested information]
[Woshib]

[][marlboroza][][Reference][][Doesn't do due diligence. User continues to promote scam ICO's and managing bounty campaigns for them]
[Wapinter]

[][suchmoon][][Reference][][Promotes multiple scam ICOs, rejects the idea of due diligence or responsibility]
[needmoney]

[][suchmoon][][Reference][][Promotes scam ICOs. See reference. Also: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4567062.0 and others.

Doesn't do due diligence. You're likely to be scammed if you participate in tokensuite campaigns or promoted ICOs]
I understand your feelings, maybe you shed your feelings and anger. (That is your right).?
Maybe I can say to you, look for complete evidence first before spilling your anger?

Who is wrong must be wrong (no one distinguishes A and B) Rules run.

[lotfiuser]

I have little opinion that there is no intention to corner who is right and wrong?
I just gave a little view of the accusation?
Whether it's true or false, I see: (Pharmacist), (actmyname), (Vod). not (Mafia) as you accuse! he works according to the rules of the forum, this person has a special team with different tasks.

But the guys who are running scam bounty they never give them red trust i think they are getting paid for that to not give a red trust when a project scam
and you can check it by your self

I give an example:

[Lauda]

[][OgNasty][][Reference][][Escrow funds weren't held transparently, no accounting for transfers, allegedly moving funds to an exchange without investor knowledge, & when questioned refuses to divulge requested information]
[Woshib]

[][marlboroza][][Reference][][Doesn't do due diligence. User continues to promote scam ICO's and managing bounty campaigns for them]
[Wapinter]

[][suchmoon][][Reference][][Promotes multiple scam ICOs, rejects the idea of due diligence or responsibility]
[needmoney]

[][suchmoon][][Reference][][Promotes scam ICOs. See reference. Also: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4567062.0 and others.

Doesn't do due diligence. You're likely to be scammed if you participate in tokensuite campaigns or promoted ICOs]
I understand your feelings, maybe you shed your feelings and anger. (That is your right).?
Maybe I can say to you, look for complete evidence first before spilling your anger?

Who is wrong must be wrong (no one distinguishes A and B) Rules run.

i dont understand what you mean but im talking about this guys iknow that others are good guys

[Quickseller]

In the past, people trying to take these types of loans would be first given a warning that what they are doing looks shady, and are given the opportunity to lock their request to avoid the negative trust.

[Jet Cash]

Selling accounts seems to be fraught with many dangers. You risk being scammed, or buying an account that my be reclaimed. You also risk the account being made unusable as a result of bad reputation claims.

Isn't it easier to do the work to build an honest account? Having to buy one seems to be a bit of an admission of failure to me.

[hilariousetc]

The Pharmacist, actmyname & Vod are actually part of the Bitcointalk Illuminati, not mafia. They already control the forum. Theymos is just a front.

Honestly, sometimes I think we should just get rid of the trust system and just let users leave feedback that doesn't effect a score, but of course this would really only benefit scammers who would then have a field day without their red paint, but maybe we should just let people be reckless with their own money. Whatever we do to try curb abuse people will just abuse that or find a way to game it so there's nothing we can really do to please everyone.

[Hivalley]

The bitcoin/bitcointalk is a decentralized system,and It simply means that there is no one who controls the system/network..

Vod,the pharmacist and actmyname are really popular members in this forum and there is no gainsaying the fact that they are working for the good of the forum trying to spot scammers and warn other users from those members,its quite a honorable thing to do

I really think they are reputable members of this forum as their trust rating shows,they have tons of positive trusts and simply so much retaliatory feedback from users whose claim hold no water

[r1s2g3]

--snip--

You forget to mention Atriz/ZapoCrypto

i dont understand what you mean but im talking about this guys iknow that others are good guys

That is the root of problem that you did not understand anything. Look like you have your own notions of right and wrong and unfortunately they are not correct.
For you first negative by Vod, I guess you are trying to take loan that is worth more than your collateral and in same time you was trying to sell the collateral.

[TECSHARE]

Unfortunately this shotgun type approach to leaving negative feedback is just designed to enhance the social status of the leaver by making it appear they are doing more, at the expense of simply uninformed users making simple mistakes. It happens constantly. The real problem is scammers will come back with a bought account in 30 seconds, people who made an honest mistake will just not return, leading to an increasingly scammer saturated environment.

These specific circumstances could go either way, I could see this just being an honest mistake. Often these higher ranking users have no respect for the time invested in creating a reputation and will default on destroying it rather than erring on the side of caution. After all to keep track of the user is an actual investment of time. Shotgunning negatives to make yourself look good is easy.

[marlboroza]

I could see this just being an honest mistake.

I completely agree with you. This really IS honest mistake.

#Proof of authentication post
BitcoinTalk Username: lotfiuser
Telegram Username: lotfiuser
Twitter url:twitter.com/bountyairdrop31
Facebook url:https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004570035933

http://archive.is/sfRXf http://archive.is/S0OeJ http://archive.is/iD8D5

Another honest mistake:

Twitter
profile link: https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31

03.14.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/973896194727600128
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/973902180414521347
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/973968538485567490
3.15.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/974256484992339968
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/974361154616221698
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/974257060840841216
3.16.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/974754161567961088
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/974754335107305473
3.17.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975146574924992512
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975146574924992512
3.18.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975432982097022976
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975508482043666432
3.19.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975795430087970816
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/975872101021376517
3.20.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976106118438146048
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976159014500397056
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976232134477303809
3.21.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976521810647945216
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976595468150083584

3.22.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976866677152473089
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976886048155426818
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/976957772884570113
3.23.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977244910167494659
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977325180036009984
3.24.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977606589418033153
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977665718488530945
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977679487604314114
3.25.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/977981499705262081
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978043154627776512
3.26.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978329822492545026
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978405277232975872
3.27.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978692413022789633
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978731548303351809
3. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/978769340257521664
3.28.18
1. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/979056146203004930
2. https://twitter.com/bountyairdrop31/status/979090261430108162

Wait...another honest mistake:

Join Proof#
Bitcointalk Username: corpice
Telegram Username: @farida
Twitter Username: bountyairdrop31
https://twitter.com/Faridsusanto16
Facebook Username: farid rezpect slalu
https://web.facebook.com/fferdy2
Email Adress: faridima04@gmail.com
Ether Adress: 0xB736C103FB759c310A184e1ab05b010B20420c38

Oh, wait a second! Another honest mistake:




I wonder what AUTOBAN is. Bpip is confusing me.

@Vod what does "profile has been autobanned" mean?
Autobanned from bpip?
Autobanned from sending you PM?
German word for highway