[Serious Discussio]Deliberate shielding of scammers? Equally as bad as scamming?

[bonesjonesreturns]

THIS IS DISCUSSION HAS FORUM WIDE IMPLICATIONS AND DOES NOT FOCUS ON ANY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL.


If a member presents irrefutable independently verifiable evidence of scamming.  Evidence that nobody can refute and even the scammer does not deny. It is clear unquestionable evidence of scamming.

Then the scammers friends realizing they are unable to excuse or refute the evidence then try to mislead other readers by piling on in numbers screaming " defamation" or " trolling" or ordering other people to ignore, or abandon the thread?  A clear attempt to discredit or  Wash out the evidence in a mass of lies and groundless accusations..

Then clearly this is scammer shielding and supporting.

Are these scammer shielders or supporters  to be viewed as equally untrustworthy  or even more so than the scammer that does not even deny scamming, nor try to create excuses that are often totally ridiculous involving time travel and the changing of words to their opposite meaning ? Or giving opinions and statements that collapse under scrutiny then say  that their opinions are not based on reason because they claim opinions are not meant to be formed employing reason?

So are these types as untrustworthy as the scammer themselves?

Let us have a sensible debate.

If they (scammer protection crew) presented even strong or compelling evidence of scamming or directly financially dangerous behavior from " non dt" members and you said they were trolling or defaming or lying. Hmmmm

When you may ask these scammer shielders and supporters to produce the false and defamatory material they simply refuse or run away. There is no such material and they know they are spreading false and misleading information to shield their scamming friends.

On top of this . Merit is often applied to these scammer supporting lies to add extra influence.

This is not a isolated incident. This behavior is rife?

[1713905849]

1713905849

[1713905849]

1713905849

[1713905849]

1713905849

[BIT-BENDER]

What is the debate for? If you have any one that scam and you have evidence you can bring it forward. And if any one supports him and there is traceable link showing that they are a tag team bring it forward to the right section
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=129.0
And it would be addressed

[cabalism13]

I am guessing that the account is:
-an alt of CH
-an alt of someone who has a grudge on DT
-a follower of the CC Cult
-a user that has been busted by abusing campaigns

Oops wait, seems like I'm late on guessing, just saw feedbacks... LoL

[The Sceptical Chymist]

This is not a isolated incident. This behavior is rife?

I'd ask you for examples, but I'm pretty sure I already know your agenda here.  There's no need to debate generalities like what you described when specific examples with unique circumstances would probably be much more worthy of discussion--however, I'm also fairly sure we've had this and similar discussions many times in the past, and at this point it's getting very old.

Will I ever get to retire this picture?

Not as long as OP and his alts keep beating dead horses like this.  

I am guessing that the account is:
-an alt of CH
-an alt of someone who has a grudge on DT

I'm wondering if it's an alt of TECSHARE.  Who knows?

[bonesjonesreturns]

This is not a isolated incident. This behavior is rife?

I'd ask you for examples, but I'm pretty sure I already know your agenda here.  There's no need to debate generalities like what you described when specific examples with unique circumstances would probably be much more worthy of discussion--however, I'm also fairly sure we've had this and similar discussions many times in the past, and at this point it's getting very old.

Will I ever get to retire this picture?

Not as long as OP and his alts keep beating dead horses like this.  

I am guessing that the account is:
-an alt of CH
-an alt of someone who has a grudge on DT

I'm wondering if it's an alt of TECSHARE.  Who knows?

Agenda? What does that matter when the member is producing irrefutable  independently verifiable  evidence of scamming.
These criticisms seem like scammer shielding. Scraping up any excuse to avoid tackling the irrefutable evidence.
This is dangerous behavior.

Are you saying you would ignore irrefutable independently verifiable evidence of scamming just because the person may have an agenda?
Please answer this.

I'm confused as to how time is relevant to the discussion

It is quite clear that attempting to cast or portray irrefutable evidence of scamming as either defamation or trolling is scammer shielding or protecting.

This thread you have already the members trying to derail even the topic of discussion. This should not be permitted.

There are numerous examples. The number of times this topic has been avoided does not reduce the validity of the question
Are those seeking to shield or support scammers as bad or perhaps worse than the scammers themselves?

There can be no doubt that to attempt to brand irrefutable evidence of scamming as "trolling or defamation " is scammer shielding and endangering honest members.

I was sure i posted this is meta for a discussion this has no place in reputation as it mentions no individuals.
This is a discussion that has implications for the entire forum.

Hence why i will lock this and repost in meta. If it is moved again then i will open a thread jn meta asking why mods are trying to hide it in reputation without my requesting it to be moved here.

Looks like further scammer shielding.

[yahoo62278]

If you presented yourself in a different manner vs wall of text accusation bullshit, the people of this forum might pay more attention to what you say.

Instead you act like a 12 year old throwing shit at the walls and hoping something sticks. Not sure why you have to act like this.

If you have something to say, then post it with solid proof. Don't just spout off at the mouth. Post your evidence, post the rules you feel are being broken, and post it without it looking like a book.

[bonesjonesreturns]

If you presented yourself in a different manner vs wall of text accusation bullshit, the people of this forum might pay more attention to what you say.

Instead you act like a 12 year old throwing shit at the walls and hoping something sticks. Not sure why you have to act like this.

If you have something to say, then post it with solid proof. Don't just spout off at the mouth. Post your evidence, post the rules you feel are being broken, and post it without it looking like a book.

This in entirely untrue.

There is no throwing a bunch of shit at the wall and hoping it sticks.
What accusations have I made that are not fully corroborated with irrefutable independantly verifiable evidence?

If you find some " shit" that was refuted or debunked or " didn't stick" then go ahead a bring it for analysis.
Are you claiming that you will ignore independently verifiable irrefutable proof of scamming or financially motivated wrong doing if it is not packaged or presented in the way you say it should be?

You are willing to let proven scammers float around unpunished with no warning on their account in positions of trust because I called them scamming scum? Or in a manner you found annoying?
This is your argument.
You only need look up a couple of posts to notice one member is deliberately  trying to derail and discourage discussion of scammer shielding.
I ask him to present which parts of the opening post are trolling as why he feels he should seek to prevent the debate or discussion that i am calling for.
He will not. The reason being there is no trolling there. He simply seeks to prevent the discussion taking place.

Scammer shielding and supporting needs to be addressed.

[bonesjonesreturns]

I truly hope Theymos nukes all of your alt accounts. This is getting sad to watch.

This is exactly the kind of desperate scammer supporter i am dealing with.
Crying and begging for whistleblowers to be banned.

Then here he is crying for a ban? Based on what?
Can you present the evidence or produce specific examples of the incorrect or false information I have presented that warrants a ban?

You have kindly demonstrated the specific behavior I am referring too. Desperate scammer shielding.
You say theymos should ban members for whistle blowing on your scamming friends? Is that right?

I challenge you now to present the false and incorrect information that you believe warrants a ban?
Hurry back scammer shielder.
I must also note that many of these scammer supporters seem to be sponsored by fortunejack?

Reward and support undeniable scammers and ban those that whistle blow on them says thenewanon?

Are these people as bad as the scammers themselves?

So far then, lots of attempts to derail, fallacious excuses, bogus dismissals  and some pathetic and desperate crying for banning.
The objective reader will immediately notice the clear determination to prevent the debate by any desperate methods they believe they can get away with.

[Pmalek]

Can you present the evidence or produce specific examples of the incorrect or false information I have presented that warrants a ban?

Can you present the specific case and the undeniable evidence that you found and that motivated you to create this thread in a calm and professional manner?
How can you call this thread a serious discussion when you have accused every member who posted here to be a scammer, scammer shielder, scum, etc, etc. 

[Lauda]

May I refer you to an excellent post of mine?

[bonesjonesreturns]

Can you present the evidence or produce specific examples of the incorrect or false information I have presented that warrants a ban?

Can you present the specific case and the undeniable evidence that you found and that motivated you to create this thread in a calm and professional manner?
How can you call this thread a serious discussion when you have accused every member who posted here to be a scammer, scammer shielder, scum, etc, etc.  

The undeniable proof of scamming, auction scamming or willing scam facilitating for pay and attempted deletion of the evidence

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231720.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.0

The dirty turds thread has documented evidence of the auction scamming. The excuses and scammer shielding there is quite atrocious.

Firstly read and research it thoroughly then if you want to mount any kind of refutation create a thread and i will demonstrate you are wrong.

This scammer shielding and supporting has been going on far too long.
If you then wish to see the threads where presenting this irrefutable evidence of clear financially motivated wrong doing results in excuses, weak defenses that crumble. Then when that does not work the screaming of " trolling"  or defamer or needs to be banned start up.

Of course i expect to be taken very seriously for calling scammers = scammer and scammer supporters  = scammer supporters and both of them scumbags?

What do you suggest i called a confirmed and undeniable scammer? Or those that support or shield them?

This is not a thread to drill down on certain individuals. The forum needs to take seriously those that support and shield scammers.  They are endangering honest members of the forum.

If your pals are caught scamming or willing to facilitate scamming for money then they need to be punished in the same context all members are punished. Certainly they should not be on default trust 1.

Now if you wish to discuss specific members start a thread and i will come to you there.

This thread is a debate on what action should be taken for those that are deliberately shielding scammers because they are friends with them or mutually benefit from them avoiding punishment.


You can and should not have people screaming "troll" defamer , you need to be banned, you have repeated this too many times, ordering members to ignore, ordering members not to post on their threads and then red tagging members for presenting irrefutable evidence of scamming.

This needs to be addressed.

Not one person here has dared to tackle the issue it is one derailing attempt after another  
They know they are defending scammers and have done so continuously.

Lauda may be turning over a new leaf i see the pics hes posting are at least providing a more accurate representation of what lauda really looks like compared to the hot female from GOT that he has nullius and qwk fantasizing over.
Amazon vouchers will be drying up.