Bitcoin Forum
February 23, 2019, 12:01:52 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DefaultTrust changes  (Read 26175 times)
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862
Merit: 2630


takav mrak


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 09:52:47 PM
 #1161

You call us manipulators

I'll call you a candidate for the blacklist. Better?



Let's see what kind of information we will get

I see this as an attempt to intimidate. Not going to work but feel free to waste your money.

Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 274

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 09:56:09 PM
 #1162

Look at my trust right now,does their feedback appropriate? accused me of conspiracy by distrusting people that i wanted to? looks like they are abusing the trust system..I am not active for months but i logged in everyday and read some useful threads and then by customizing my trustlist gives me a redtrust?
You know, you might have had a chance at convincing me to remove your negative trust had you not got your accounts mixed up when PMing me about it. What a way to burn an alt. Roll Eyes



I think everyone here is taking the "easy" way out. It's VERY easy to take the side of the one with power rather than a red-trusted newbie.

But imagine if it were OgNasty that made the thread of removing Lauda from DT?
It would have made no difference, at least not to me. H8bussesNbicycles didn't even have negative trust before making that thread, and I didn't even know who he was (I still don't, but I'm pretty sure he's no newbie).


since when its not allowed to have multiple accounts ?



You call us manipulators

I'll call you a candidate for the blacklist. Better?



Let's see what kind of information we will get

I see this as an attempt to intimidate. Not going to work but feel free to waste your money.

Actually its not.
Person wrote me he is going to send some screenshots as proof and made some nasty claims i don't want to post in public before seeing any evidance
(since i'm not working like you to post first accusations and later search for any kind of evidence)

Foxpup
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2464
Merit: 1319



View Profile
February 05, 2019, 10:09:10 PM
 #1163

since when its not allowed to have alts?
It's perfectly allowed for untrustworthy users to have alts; that's why I only gave them negative trust instead of reporting the tell-tale PMs and getting them both banned. Tongue

Will pretend to do unverifiable things (while actually eating an enchilada-style burrito) for bitcoins: 1K6d1EviQKX3SVKjPYmJGyWBb1avbmCFM4
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 274

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 10:17:15 PM
 #1164

since when its not allowed to have alts?
It's perfectly allowed for untrustworthy users to have alts; that's why I only gave them negative trust instead of reporting the tell-tale PMs and getting them both banned. Tongue

Quote
Having multiple accounts and account sales are allowed, but account sales are discouraged.


So why did he get tagged  ?
If you tagg him you should also tagg the accounts of suchmoon such as glem or tagg any other known alt.

Also who are you to decide if somebody is untrustworthy or not ?Based on what evidence are you making these taggs ?

Cause currently i can only see that you are abusing the trust system which has been confirmed by theymos.

minifrij
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1082



View Profile WWW
February 05, 2019, 10:37:06 PM
Merited by Foxpup (2)
 #1165

Also who are you to decide if somebody is untrustworthy or not ?
Foxpup: Is put onto a system defined by the community to measure the accuracy of ratings

Thule: 'excuse me who put you in charge, mr?!?'
theymos
Administrator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3304
Merit: 4939


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 10:46:22 PM
Merited by dbshck (4), suchmoon (4), JayJuanGee (1), LoyceV (1)
 #1166

Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me.

I'm wondering whether you specifically disapprove of account dealers being tagged--not necessarily your opinion on the matter, but whether you'd consider that an inappropriate use of the trust system.

Since some people view account sales as fundamentally untrustworthy, I think it's an appropriate use.

I have no problem with your (theymos) conclusion that "H8bussesNbicycles's thread looks like [politics] to me", but isn't there a bit of a problem with the self-moderation aspect of certain kinds of threads, especially when dealing with seemingly meta issues? 

For example, I had 6 posts deleted from that thread so of course, now I don't even attempt to participate or pay attention to postings in that particular thread, since I could not even contribute if I wanted to, except if I were to exclude Lauda from my trust list, then they might allow my posts, and I thought that my posts were innocuous, even though obviously the contents of my posts likely distracted from the message that they want to promote in that thread and spread through the forum if they are able, inaccurate as some other members might find such thread messages to be.

I don't find it unreasonable to have a restrictive selfmod thread. You can guess from the banner & deletion stats that it's going to be a restrictive, single-viewpoint thread. You could always start another topic.

That said, using selfmod topics in a deceptive way can be an appropriate reason for negative trust.

1NXYoJ5xU91Jp83XfVMHwwTUyZFK64BoAD
The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 2470



View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:05:15 PM
 #1167

So why did he get tagged  ?
If you tagg him you should also tagg the accounts of suchmoon such as glem or tagg any other known alt.
Take this up in a new thread if you have an issue with tagging of alts/account sales.  Alts are allowed and are not automatically red-trusted by anyone unless the main account is red-trusted.  Timelord2067 is/was giving neutral trust for alts, though I'm not sure if he's still doing that.

Theymos answered my question about account sales, and I appreciate it.  Every case should be judged individually, IMO, which I waffled on for quite some time--and that's one reason why suchmoon's purchase of Gleb's account didn't result in me tagging either one of them; why I removed my tag on iluvbitcoins; why I didn't tag OmegaStarScream; and so on.  Those peeps are otherwise trustworthy, even if they did engage in a behavior I disagree with.

Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 274

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:05:49 PM
 #1168

Also who are you to decide if somebody is untrustworthy or not ?
Foxpup: Is put onto a system defined by the community to measure the accuracy of ratings

Thule: 'excuse me who put you in charge, mr?!?'


I am the community asking questions on which facts he makes his ratings if a person is untrustworthy or not.
A problem with that ?

minifrij
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1834
Merit: 1082



View Profile WWW
February 05, 2019, 11:07:52 PM
Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
 #1169

I am the community asking questions on which facts he makes his ratings if a person is untrustworthy or not.
A problem with that ?
Yes. You are a person, not a community.
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 274

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:08:13 PM
Last edit: February 05, 2019, 11:40:06 PM by Thule
 #1170

So why did he get tagged  ?
If you tagg him you should also tagg the accounts of suchmoon such as glem or tagg any other known alt.
Take this up in a new thread if you have an issue with tagging of alts/account sales.  Alts are allowed and are not automatically red-trusted by anyone unless the main account is red-trusted.  Timelord2067 is/was giving neutral trust for alts, though I'm not sure if he's still doing that.

Theymos answered my question about account sales, and I appreciate it.  Every case should be judged individually, IMO, which I waffled on for quite some time--and that's one reason why suchmoon's purchase of Gleb's account didn't result in me tagging either one of them; why I removed my tag on iluvbitcoins; why I didn't tag OmegaStarScream; and so on.  Those peeps are otherwise trustworthy, even if they did engage in a behavior I disagree with.


So to receive the right to buy an alt without getting a negative feedback is that you need to know that user.
Seems very centralised to me.How many of all users do you know on that forum to make a proper judgement ?


Quote
Yes. You are a person, not a community.
[/quote][/quote]
Actually i'm part of the community and represent a group with diffrent opinions



@theymos

Quote
Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me.

If you get active on stinger how does it come you didn't get activ on these merit abusers ?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2829282.0

Quote
Oh right OP , you'd still complain because you're a butthurt idiot

You call that quality which deserved 50 merits ?
From atriz (alt of Lauda) to Lauda himself ?

I really see you trying to change that forum into a decentralised place run by the community.However acting on DT's member request (like stinger) but being at the same time blind of merit abuse from Lauda and other DT members instantly puts an imbalance between community power and current DT members who have circled merits for a longer time which is a known fact.


I mean show me any quality threads of TMAN or Vod as example ?
How did they mainly get their merits ?
Surely not for posting quality posts but people supporting their actions like tagging someone.Calling someone out etc.
So if they got their main merit from supporters of actions why do you put the community in a disadvantage that we are not allowed to merit peoples action we support ?


Quote
I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.
Many DT members have majority of their merit from people supporting their actions instead of post quality.Didn't see any actions on that?
Maybe someone can show me the quality posts where Lauda earned his merits.

H8bussesNbicycles
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 8


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:09:50 PM
 #1171

Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me


Theymos I agree with your statement and promise that I will not buy any merits to vote against lauda and the cult. Though I have mentioned it I will refrain.
I might state that merits given toward the cause are helpful but I promise I will not buy any merits. I did not solicit Stingers for merits but only after he showed up point him to where merits would help.
I did not know he was a source until suchmoon or someone pointed it out.
It is fine with me that you rescinded those merits.


That said, using selfmod topics in a deceptive way can be an appropriate reason for negative trust.

 
I do not believe that I have used selfmod topics in a deceptive way.
I have only kept their signature spamming and merit whoring out of my thread and kept it to the topic.
Many of their quotes are still there for all to read whoever responded to them. If I was trying to hide their statements I would have deleted them too.


The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 2470



View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:12:31 PM
 #1172

So to receive the right to buy an alt without getting a negative feedback is that you need to know that user.
Seems very centralised to me.How many of all users do you know on that forum to make a proper judgement ?
Um, no.  I don't know any of those members personally.  The judgement comes from their overall trust, i.e., the decentralized trust system.  Gleb has a neg right now, but I disagree with that one and thus haven't tagged him.

Edit:
counter it then pussycat
Sorry, not a fan of giving counter-feedback.

xtraelv
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 1105


฿ear ride on the rainbow slide


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:15:07 PM
Merited by madnessteat (1)
 #1173

Quote
taikuri13
WhiteManWhite
What are these people doing in DT1? Looks like the ruskis have succesfully colluded their way into DT1. Smiley

I have been working with Taikuri13 for quite some time. If you look at some of his posts and my posts you will see that he has done translations for me regarding some of the historic topics and scam warnings. He has helped me a lot behind the scenes and is a highly merited user on the Russian forum. I don't see any collusion there.


We are surrounded by legends on this forum. Phenomenal successes and catastrophic failures. Then there are the scams. This forum is a digital museum.  
* The most iconic historic bitcointalk threads.* Satoshi * Cypherpunks*MtGox*Bitcointalk hacks*pHiShInG* Silk Road*Pirateat40*Knightmb*Miner shams*Forum scandals*BBCode*
Thank you to madnessteat for my custom avatar hat.
H8bussesNbicycles
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 8


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:15:50 PM
 #1174

Gleb has a neg right now, but I disagree with that one and thus haven't tagged him.

counter it with a positive then pussycat
Thule
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 274

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 05, 2019, 11:19:14 PM
 #1175

So to receive the right to buy an alt without getting a negative feedback is that you need to know that user.
Seems very centralised to me.How many of all users do you know on that forum to make a proper judgement ?
Um, no.  I don't know any of those members personally.  The judgement comes from their overall trust, i.e., the decentralized trust system.  Gleb has a neg right now, but I disagree with that one and thus haven't tagged him.


I thought you are against account sales?This account has been clearly being offered for sale and suchmoon is now under control of it.
Do you support account sales in any form that you are not tagging this one ?I thought account sales are being discouraged ?

So how does it come that new accounts which have no negative trust gets instantly a negative feedback when trying to buy an account and a known account doesnt if the overall trust is ok ?

So why did you tagged me ?I have an account which is several years old .Never had a negative feedback only positiv ones.Why did you tagg me negativly ?I mean the overall trust was positiv ?Wasn't it ?


Quote
counter it then pussycat
adding me more negative feedback won't change anything.He knows it

cryptohunter
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2016
Merit: 1117

MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 12:19:23 AM
Last edit: February 06, 2019, 12:49:00 AM by cryptohunter
 #1176

However if he tried to actually "game" the system to his advantage (not saying he did) should THAT be tagged?

With gaming the system I mean influencing DT list for his own sake or agenda and not for legitimate reasons. See Thule et al.

If the "gaming" takes the form of strategically sending a lot of merit, creating sockuppets, and stuff like that, then no. That sort of gaming might get me to blacklist people, in fact. But if it looks more like politics, then that's OK, and that's what H8bussesNbicycles's thread looks like to me.

Is stingers still a merit source? Sending merits to pad H8's gang to 10 merits so that they would have votes. Not sure if that counts as "strategic".

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5103988.msg49590110#msg49590110

How can you say those merits are simply not deserved? merits are subjective and posts fighting dishonest untrustworthy practises are most deserving. Like people being rewarded for busting scams or other "possible" shady dealings.

I say looking at your bpip and your "friends" bpips these look very "strategic" hence why you are all on in a position to strategically include each other on DT1

There is no rules at all for giving merit is all subjective nonsense. I have proven certain posts are nothing but false assumptions and merely politically motivated faux and empty rebuttals. Yet still they get a ton of merit and the correct and valuable posts get nothing.

This entire merit thing is a sham.

You get into a debate with any of the merit cyclers and regardless of whom is correct or which are the valuable posts they just allocate merit to posts that follow their political views or ideologies. That is why I was trying to define an objective set of criteria that could define a valuable post. Of course none of the merit cyclers wish for that because that stops people like fox pup firing out merit just for any reason. I mean jet cash gave out some the other day because he said he was bored of hearing the same facts being presented against the same person or some rubbish like this.

Merit is the most damaging thing here and now it is tied to DT with this ludicrous 250 earned cycled merit threshold (they all boast about and taunt others saying you will never be able to touch us because we will not allow you to have the merits needed) .. i mean i have asked loyce bring me a some of your great thought inspiring or even very interesting posts (not stats  copy and paste) he brings nothing, I ask tman bring me some of your greatest posts and contribution for debate.... nothing. I mean a handful can present some Okay posts ...nothing of any real importance or that look like a lot of thought went in to them. This main merit circle gang produce nothing but a constant rehash of their own ideologies and parroting support for them for merits. 

Political reasons for meriting are far more common that from analysing the content of the post for the purposes of reaching an optimal solution or outcome.

Now I notice some says okay I agree politically with your views and i will look for a post supporting those views that was well written and expresses clearly the issues with the current status quo and some possible solutions for reaching an optimal outcome in terms of fairness and equality for all and ..............suchmoon starts crying about it and of course those merits need to be removed at once.

Lets start going through all of their posts and see which deserve merits on the basis of the quality and value they provide. You will find significant amounts are awarded during each debate simply for their views aligning with the politics of other cyclers and nothing to do with the logical argument provided and nothing to do with reaching the optimal solution or even reaching the truth.

Let's introduce some criteria for what is a valuable posts and if merit sources are found awarding and cycling merits outside of that then they are removed like stingers. Fox pup awards merit like sweets to his pals for usually nonsense posts or just taking the piss.
How did this person even get so many merits to hand in vast amounts to so many of the same people that all include themselves on dt?


TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2786
Merit: 1191


Welcome to Bitcoin Stalk


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2019, 12:56:04 AM
 #1177

Is stingers still a merit source?
Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

Regardless of how justifiable it is, this is not helping your "I wanna do this hands off" argument.

BITCOINTALK STAFF SELECTIVELY ENFORCE THE RULES IN AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE A CHILL EFFECT AND PERMANENTLY REMOVE ME AND OTHERS FROM THIS FORUM AS RETALIATION FOR SPEAKING OUT ABOUT THEIR ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR, AND THAT OF THEIR PERSONAL CLIQUES.
mikeywith
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Activity: 322
Merit: 427

be constructive or S.T.F.U


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 01:34:24 AM
 #1178

Regardless of how justifiable it is, this is not helping your "I wanna do this hands off" argument.

he differently can't let everything 100% under user control, look at the mess and you will understand, manual intervention is always needed. stingers is clearly merting those guys to get himself a clean profile again, if the other "party" has any similar proof of merit abuse against their "opponents" - they should present it, whining does not get anybody anywhere, proofs usually do.

don't get me wrong i agree with your logic, i personally disagree with the the way that many DT members use the trust system to non-trust related subjects, but this does not mean their rattings that are based on trust are not accurate, if we let a new group take over the trust system overnight then tons of scammers will be set free, these changes have to be done in fair manner, changing for better must be slow,steady and logical, if not ,then we will create a worse mess, i rather see current DT members re-think their negs, focus on trust only subjects, this will solve 90% of the current issues.

JayJuanGee
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1806
Merit: 1598


How much alt coin diversification is needed? 0%?


View Profile
February 06, 2019, 02:19:04 AM
Merited by Foxpup (2)
 #1179

Is stingers still a merit source?

Not anymore. That's clear abuse, awarding merit for political reasons rather than any idea of quality. Only because he was a source, I effectively undid those merit sends. If he had not been a merit source, I still would've blacklisted anyone who got into DT1 through that type of shenanigans.

I hadn't read into the thread deeply enough to see that stuff. Those are better arguments against the trustworthiness of H8bussesNbicycles & co., but note that the current negative-trust-ratings were sent long before that. Before February, the thread looks like politics to me


Theymos I agree with your statement and promise that I will not buy any merits to vote against lauda and the cult. Though I have mentioned it I will refrain.
I might state that merits given toward the cause are helpful but I promise I will not buy any merits. I did not solicit Stingers for merits but only after he showed up point him to where merits would help.
I did not know he was a source until suchmoon or someone pointed it out.
It is fine with me that you rescinded those merits.


That said, using selfmod topics in a deceptive way can be an appropriate reason for negative trust.

 
I do not believe that I have used selfmod topics in a deceptive way.
I have only kept their signature spamming and merit whoring out of my thread and kept it to the topic.
Many of their quotes are still there for all to read whoever responded to them. If I was trying to hide their statements I would have deleted them too.

My 6 posts in that thread that you deleted, H8bussesNbicycles, were relatively innocuous.  They were not signature spamming (I have no signature) and they were not merit whoring because I have plenty of merits and I was just attempting to make experiential observations on the topic, and even largely substantively neutral posts, since I was not trying to get deeply involved into the politics.

I am a bit skeptical about your deletion of my posts, whether that rises to the level of deception on your part or merely a heavy deletion finger remains somewhat unanswered, at least from my perspective.

Put BTC here: 35EVP8EePt8dyvKHaB7bXaRmKLm22YgRCA

How much alt coin diversification is necessary? if you are investing in Bitcoin, then perhaps 0%?
Timelord2067
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1154


https://www.timelord2067.com/forums/index.php


View Profile WWW
February 06, 2019, 02:26:28 AM
 #1180

Archived for future reference: http://archive.fo/prEh6#selection-1905.0-1941.187

I do not view it as appropriate for trust ratings to relate primarily to non-trust matters. By giving someone negative trust, you're basically attaching a note to all of their posts telling people "warning: do not trade with this person!". If we can get DT working well enough, in the future I'd like to prevent guests from even viewing topics by negative-trust users in trust-enabled sections, so you have to ask yourself whether your negative trust would warrant this sort of significant effect.

In particular, in my view:
 - Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
 - Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid.
 - You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
 - It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.
 
I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists.



So theymos...

I take it you're going to sit down and write a letter to all the persons who've given me negative trust (an small example of which is contained in the screen shot below) and demand they remove it to follow your guide-lines?





What about the DT Trolls TM who've either bullied others to remove their trust of me or given me negative DT trust because they simply didn't agree with my findings on a handful of Known Alts of any-one cases, but neither had the courage nore the ability to voice their concerns in the forum or in a PM?

Known Alts of any-one - A User Generated List Mk III Poll: When leaving trust for known Alt's of other users | Broadcast Your RAW Transaction | Get Paid in BitCoin | (NetHack 3.6.0 Hearse V 1.0.6e) | Twitter: @Timelord2067 Retweet ≠ endorsement | Cryptopia - ONLINE ARTICLES related to hack & theft of funds 2019 | SEXCoin Forum | Other Forums: #BritishFolk #SFFHCF | Vanity Wallet Generation | Wallet Verified | BPIP | Tip of the hat: BTC SXC | (USA) Donate Blood today at One Blood dot ORG | £ $ ₹ € ¥ ¢ ? ÷ BTC I am not an escrow service... | My proof quickseller is an Alt of master-P has been deleted by BitCoinTalk - read archived version here:
Pages: « 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!