A boycott of replies to the recent extensive trolling by cryptohunter

[Lauda]

Where does one find a priest of the Cult of Lauda to confess my sins? I'm engaging with that asshat again.  

Here. Pick one:


Scampuzz just didn't update the image yet, the numbers have doubled (or even tripled) since last time.

[Timelord2067]

Forgive me father, (or is it mother) for I have sinned. I couldn't help myself. I merited Jet Cash in his meta thread and the troll basically stated the person who merited him (me) was a scaredy cat. Please forgive me and tell me what my Penance should be. I want to be worthy of partaking in the holy cat nip.

Brethren: *Always* have the holy cap-nip within paws grasp before confessing one's sins.

[VINSIN]

Oh gosh, this guy is really having a mental problem....i know geeks can get awkward sometimes but..this guy just breaks all the limits )

[actmyname]

From what I've seen, cryptohunter is reasonable if you have the time to respond to his concerns... which can change.
This is just a simple case of an exacerbated incident because sometimes his posts are extremely...

[Quickseller]

I am not familiar with him, but once you are certain someone is a troll, it is probably best to simply ignore him.
<snip>
You can make your point and show your logic, however at a point this becomes futile.

I'm surprised you've missed all the commotion cryptohunter has created, but take a look at his post history and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about. 

I have seen more of his posts, and believe he is most probably a troll.

I am on the fence if he even agrees with the positions he takes. It is possible he (and a few others) are going to extreme lengths to criticize certain people, so that legit criticism of these people are assumed to be trolling and are ignored.

It is my opinion that the negative ratings others have given him are inappropriate for a number of reasons. First of all, he does not appear to trade with anyone, so leaving the negative ratings will not actually warn anyone against doing business with him. Secondly, the negative ratings only give him more to complain about. Lastly, I don't think him trolling is an indication that he is a scammer.

My prediction is he will eventually get banned for trolling, and he will try to appeal that ban, and eventually his appeal account will get banned for trolling.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

I am on the fence if he even agrees with the positions he takes. It is possible he (and a few others) are going to extreme lengths to criticize certain people, so that legit criticism of these people are assumed to be trolling and are ignored.

Even if there's legitimate criticism somewhere in all of his rambling, he's made his point many times over and at this point everything he's writing is just trolling.  If the community thought he had valid points, he'd have garnered some support but that doesn't seem to be happening--and he just doesn't grasp that. 

It is my opinion that the negative ratings others have given him are inappropriate for a number of reasons. First of all, he does not appear to trade with anyone, so leaving the negative ratings will not actually warn anyone against doing business with him. Secondly, the negative ratings only give him more to complain about. Lastly, I don't think him trolling is an indication that he is a scammer.

Negative trust isn't just given to scammers, and you know that.  If Theymos thinks members ought to leave negs ONLY for people scamming or suspected of scamming, then he would make a rule requiring that.  As far as CH is concerned, he's spreading lies and breaking rules and other DT members are fed up with it.  I don't blame them for giving him a neg.

My prediction is he will eventually get banned for trolling<snip>

That would be nice.  He's one of the worst trolls I've seen since I've been a member here, and not because of his attacks against me.  It's because of his constant derailing of threads, repetition of the same nonsense over and over, and his obvious use of alt accounts to give the illusion that someone agrees with him (Chosen Username is the first one that comes to mind, but there may be others).  It's time for him to go.

[Quickseller]

I am on the fence if he even agrees with the positions he takes. It is possible he (and a few others) are going to extreme lengths to criticize certain people, so that legit criticism of these people are assumed to be trolling and are ignored.

Even if there's legitimate criticism somewhere in all of his rambling, he's made his point many times over and at this point everything he's writing is just trolling.  If the community thought he had valid points, he'd have garnered some support but that doesn't seem to be happening--and he just doesn't grasp that. 

He goes to extremes to voice his points, and that turns people off from wanting to support him.

It is my opinion that the negative ratings others have given him are inappropriate for a number of reasons. First of all, he does not appear to trade with anyone, so leaving the negative ratings will not actually warn anyone against doing business with him. Secondly, the negative ratings only give him more to complain about. Lastly, I don't think him trolling is an indication that he is a scammer.

Negative trust isn't just given to scammers, and you know that.  If Theymos thinks members ought to leave negs ONLY for people scamming or suspected of scamming, then he would make a rule requiring that.  As far as CH is concerned, he's spreading lies and breaking rules and other DT members are fed up with it.  I don't blame them for giving him a neg.

Theymos has said what a negative rating is for:

Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.

I know you believe this should be updated, but it has not been updated. Perhaps I will create a new thread for this elsewhere, as I do feel strongly about this.

However if I were to concede that negative ratings can be given for reasons other than "someone is a scammer, or strongly believe someone is a scammer", then I would ask what purpose the negative rating to CH gives? From what I can tell, the negatives do not affect him in any way. I see little purpose in giving the ratings against CH beyond stroking the ego of those who gave the negatives.

Again the harm in the negative ratings is that CH can now complain (and troll) about one more issue.

My prediction is he will eventually get banned for trolling<snip>

That would be nice.  He's one of the worst trolls I've seen since I've been a member here, and not because of his attacks against me.  It's because of his constant derailing of threads, repetition of the same nonsense over and over, and his obvious use of alt accounts to give the illusion that someone agrees with him (Chosen Username is the first one that comes to mind, but there may be others).  It's time for him to go.

It will take some time because the forum does not take excluding people from the community lightly.

One of my favorite trolls was WoodCollector (I believe this was from before your time here, unless you browsed before creating an account). Unlike CH, he actually tried trading around here, but when he was caught being a scammer, he turned into a troll. Here are some WC threads for your reading pleasure:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=930649.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=933888.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=864472.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=931472.0;all
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=935115.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=932131.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=931109.0

I think the above links are in a good order. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for a decent amount of time, but eventually the facts came out that cemented him as a scammer.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Perhaps I will create a new thread for this elsewhere, as I do feel strongly about this.

Go for it.  Maybe Theymos might weigh in on it, but if he doesn't then I suspect things will continue much the way they're going now.

It will take some time because the forum does not take excluding people from the community lightly.

That's not what I've seen based on the number of ban appeal threads in Meta, even if most of them are for plagiarism and not trolling. 

I've no idea how cryptohunter used to be, but right now he's just an extremely annoying, obnoxious, disruptive troll, with not a small amount of paranoia and idiocy sprinkled into the mix.  That's why I can't read his garbage anymore.  I feel like doing so wastes precious minutes of my life that I'll never get back, plus I come away from his posts with the sensation that my IQ might have dropped a couple of points--I don't have that many to spare, you know.

[LoyceMobile]

Judging by his feedback from greenspaces, he was an "Angry kid annoying the hell out of forum members" 5 years ago already.
The only thing that changed is that he moved from the Altcoin boards where barely anyone reads his posts to Meta and Reputation
At more than 50 posts per day, I now see threads with an ignored post almost every other post.

This summarizes it nicely:

cryptohunter you need to go out & get laid, find a fucking hobby or something man.

[TMAN]

cryptohunter you need to go out & get laid, find a fucking hobby or something man.

13K posts - 89 merit, says it all really - guarantee the fucker hasn't got the charm to get laid - plus it probably does actually look like a troll and live in its mothers basement

[TalkStar]

I've no idea how cryptohunter used to be, but right now he's just an extremely annoying, obnoxious, disruptive troll, with not a small amount of paranoia and idiocy sprinkled into the mix.  That's why I can't read his garbage anymore.  I feel like doing so wastes precious minutes of my life that I'll never get back, plus I come away from his posts with the sensation that my IQ might have dropped a couple of points--I don't have that many to spare, you know.

Yeah its really annoying to have same manner and post from an common person everytime.I think its should be prohibited otherwise it will completely affect our forum regular activities.

Trolling is being out of limit now. It will be hard to find a single corner where these guys are not making troll or attacking someone personally. I wish if we can find a complete solution to get rid of those.

13K posts - 89 merit, says it all really - guarantee the fucker hasn't got the charm to get laid - plus it probably does actually look like a troll and live in its mothers basement

If someone always put his head on bad water than its nothing to do for us.Just what we can do is "ignore". It will not be a wise idea to wish good activities from everyone. Otherwise what kind of happiness someone get by doing this meaningless boring work.

[suchmoon]

I think this needs to be bumped with a reminder of whom we're dealing with here. See the bold part (emphasis mine). It's a blatant call to spam the threads where cryptohunter's "enemies" are posting. So please DO NOT FEED THE TROLL.

We can certainly win. Never give up.

As the number of abused increases then a union can be formed.

We can push for an entire change of the system that permits and even enforces this abuse of honest members.

1. find the threads they post in.
2. present only on topic and relevant facts demonstrating their untrustworthy natures and provide evidence to invalidate their future abuse of others.

There are going to be more abused than abusers.

This must continue until the system itself is altered and criteria given that eliminates this subjective and selfishly motivated abuse of honest members.

This is just the start. Abusers will not stop abusing until it is taken out of their control.

We must be careful of .

1. real scammers and untrustworthy must never join our union and that we NEVER defend their actions.
2. we stick only to presentation of facts and observable events that are relevant and on topic.
3. We do not just think of ourselves. We will not permit abuse of any honest person here. We will speak up and defend this abuse where it is clear abuse is taking place.
4. Not giving up or giving into to their  threats and gang tactics.

This union should have one clear mandate.

Ensure that the same fair and honest treatment is applied to ALL members of this board.

[o_e_l_e_o]

I've been ignoring him for quite some time, but this post just shows how far he's fallen.

He started off arguing that not all plagiarizers should be banned, and there are some amazing newbies not receiving merit. While I disagree with those points (the latter having pretty much been proved wrong by this thread) and I disagreed with the way he made them, I thought he was simply misguided. I even argued on his behalf to try to clear his negative trust, even though all I got in return from him was abuse.

Now he is advocating for scammers. He is supporting the use of a trust list which would aim to replace the entirety of DT with a bunch of accounts which are either inactive, trolls, scammers, or some combination of those three. This would give literally thousands of scammers a clean trust rating and release them back on to the forum. This is no longer just misguided trolling.

[nutildah]

A great idea, I regret not reading this thread earlier.

Guy (or gal) is completely off their respective rocker.

Consider it done.

Now he is advocating for scammers. He is supporting the use of a trust list which would aim to replace the entirety of DT with a bunch of accounts which are either inactive, trolls, scammers, or some combination of those three. This would give literally thousands of scammers a clean trust rating and release them back on to the forum.

As far as I understand how the new system works, the chance that this will actually happen is extremely unlikely.

[o_e_l_e_o]

As far as I understand how the new system works, the chance that this will actually happen is extremely unlikely.

Oh absolutely. I had a quick look through the users in that thread and the ones who are using the trust list that OP posted. cryptohunter has the most earned merit out of any of them at 93 - most of them are just alts and sockpuppets. Between them all, they can barely scrape together enough "10 earned merit" votes to get a single person on their list to meet the DT requirements, and they aren't even close to the "250 earned merit" requirements. It will take them literally years at their current rate of earning merits to get a single one of them elected on to DT.

Bearing in mind to overthrow the system and release the tidal wave of scammers they will need more DT1 members include than exclude their list, so they are currently looking at requiring something like 30 DT1 members. It will literally never happen. Doesn't make it any less dangerous or insane to "form a union" and advocate for it though.

[marlboroza]

Bunch of sockpuppets agreeing to each other in echo chamber. CH behave like she is their advocate. Now, where have I seen this before?

~blah~

Archived http://archive.is/tUREh.

Violates local rules from unedited topic.
Violates forum rules.
Trolls.

[TMAN]

Bunch of sockpuppets agreeing to each other in echo chamber. CH behave like she is their advocate. Now, where have I seen this before?

~blah~

Archived http://archive.is/tUREh.

Violates local rules from unedited topic.
Violates forum rules.
Trolls.

The idiot broke the rules of my thread, now the fool is here doing it, surely they have been warned by the mods

[LoyceV]

Bump, the troll keeps taking over topics, breaking my local rules, and reports stay unprocessed for a long time.

[marlboroza]

^

New Local Rule (starting 50 minutes after this topic was created):
cryptohunter is no longer allowed to post in this thread.

I did some research recently and I just want to say that cryptohunter didn't break local rule. According to forum rules:

26. Local thread rules, if stated properly when the thread was started, specific enough and don't conflict with the forum rules, have to be followed.

You can go with self moderated thread but unfortunately not in Meta. I usually don't read CH's posts but I noticed some people are still arguing with her, so I went to see what she has posted, I saw the same rant, repeating the same things over and over again so I put her back on ignore.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Glad you bumped this thread, because people need a reminder that cryptohunter has been at this for months now, essentially saying the same thing over and over.  Meanwhile, the rest of the sock puppet brigade has thrown in the towel, likely because they see that whatever their goal is is futile. 

They can't figure out whether they want the whole system thrown in the trash or if they want to be on DT--and neither thing is going to happen, although TECSHARE and OgNasty might have a shot.  The rest of them don't.

Keep 'em on ignore where they belong.