Unacceptable Behaviour By Forum Moderator HostFat & Rock Trading owner eliale

[JollyGood]

IMPORTANT:

There are some serious conflict of interest by a moderator in the Italian thread called "HostFat". They are all related to the relationship HostFat has with an Italian crypto-exchange called Rock Trading and its owner/operator Andrea Medri (aka Eliale Morigi), CFO Rock Trading who has the username "eliale" in this forum.

Multiple users of this forum have stated Rock Trading is a scam and left red trust in the profile for eliale and his employee Davide Barbieri (aka Paci Barbarossa), CTO of Rock Trading who has the username "paci in this forum".

Most if it relates to the manner in which the owner of Rock Trading has used updated ToS as an excuse for selective scamming a customer. The customer (username in this forum "Coinfan") in-turn created a Scam thread here against Rock Trading.

By all intent and purposes it seems to many of those respected members of this forum that left red trust for Rock Trading (eliale) that he has decided to design excuses to maintain holding 35,000 EURO (approximately $39,000)

I will list the points of concern one by one because they are of huge importance. I really hope the Bitcointalk Team should really take a look at this and decide if "HostFat" has behaved in an acceptable and fair manner considering all the evidence clearly points to major conflicts of interest.

I hope the Bitcointalk Team also ask themselves if HostFat is somebody they would like to continue having as a moderator after all the evidence presented.

Before explaining the specific issues, please take a look at the profile for "HostFat": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203

1- First of all, you can see there is a signature, part of which states "The Rock Trading (ref): A good exchange since 2007."

It is a link that opens when clicked: (http://therocktrading.com/referral/17)

2- Second, you can see HostFat has a link in his Bitcointalk profile: Bitcoin Foundation Italia (https://www.bitcoin-italia.org)

So, when clicking the Bitcoin Foundation Italia link in the signature it opens a web page (https://www.bitcoin-italia.org) which when scrolling to the very bottom has something very interesting written in Italian on the right hand side in the footer area: "profile Disclaimer - Hosting fornito gratuitamente da The Rock Trading".

Using an online translator it loosely translates as "profile Disclaimer - Hosting provided free by The Rock Trading"

By acknowledging the points already mentioned it shows there is a clear connection between HostFat and Rock Trading.

The first shows HostFat is promoting an unofficial Bitcoin Foundation Italia website which in turn promotes Rock Trading. The second shows HostFat himself promoting Rock Trading in the hope of financial benefit because of his unique referral as stated in the signature: therocktrading.com/referral/17

As a point of clarity, HostFat claims in his signature that Rock Trading has been "A good exchange since 2007" but we all know when Bitcoin was created. Andrea Medri (eliale) from Rock Trading himself stated several times that Rock Trading has been operating since 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50365334#msg50365334) so why HostFat needs to exaggerate the date of operation is a mystery.

Keeping that aside, a clear link has been made where (HostFat) a moderator in the Italian board is clearly trying to promote Rock Trading and is clearly trying to financially benefit in affiliate commission that Rock Trading might send his way.

That in itself is not a concern because affiliates are everywhere but there is a major problem when a moderator is going beyond his remit of neutrality to give unnecessary backing to a company that the moderator benefits from in affiliate commission - even though a scam accusation has been made against it regarding approximately $39,000 of withheld crypto. Well respected members of the forum have cited Rock Trading is using every trick and every excuse in the book by selective scamming the user (Coinfan) but HostFat has a different take on it.

Keeping the two points already raised which prove a financial relationship between HostFat and Rock Trading (eliale), here are more reasons to show HostFat is going beyond his remit, is not behaving in a neutral manner and is giving unnecessary backing to Rock Trading (eliale):


3- I had never interacted with HostFat before yesterday (28th March 2019). I have no recollection of ever reading his name, profile or posts. I did in the past make an occasional post (using an online translator) in the Italian language Rock Trading scam thread created by Coinfan but never really browsed it or took much notice of it because of it being in Italian. I mostly just posted in the English language  Rock Trading scam thread.

When I posted there yesterday to address the issue and list some of points that expose this to be an attempt by Rock Trading (eliale) at selective scamming Coinfan, the Italian moderator HostFat took it upon himself to post immediately after me.

To my knowledge we had never engaged in conversation before but he wrote in Italian: "JollyGood, who wrote above, is an account used to write payment messages, probably paid by Coinfan"

To my knowledge, my reply was not met with another direct post from HostFat.

Why he thinks Coinfan would pay me or anybody else was not justified by him.

The only thing that was apparent was the manner in which HostFat jumped to the defence of Rock Trading and eliale.


4- Since HostFat initiated the accusation in the Italian language scam thread, Rock Trading owner/operator eliale decided to call me a paid mercenary in both the Italian language scam thread and the English language scam thread. It is of no consequence nor concern what eliale says to me or about me but when a moderator who should be impartial and neutral decides to side with the owner of a company that has been accused by several senior members of the community of selective scamming Coinfan - then there is a problem that the Bitcointalk Team must address.

When you look at the previous mentioned 3 points above and add to them the other issues including intimidation and bullying techniques that HostFat has thrown at Coinfan, then his behaviour becomes even more inexcusable.

In the Italian language thread you can read the following:

"@Coinfan I again moved the message to this discussion. Until next time, I might consider deleting your next message in the other discussion, possibly blocking it, and possibly asking for your ban.

The situation of Coinfan is therocktrading is quite controversial. The risk, even probable, is that by unlocking the money for Coinfan, without being sure that his situation is completely clear (that is, that Coinfan is not involved in something illegal), it is that he puts the whole therocktrading service at risk, and therefore also all the money of its users.

35000 euros are nothing for therocktrading, but if there is something illegal (regarding the situation of Coinfan), freeing them towards Coinfan, in fact puts the whole service at risk, including the users' money, which would eventually even be seized by the authorities , for who knows how many months if not years. (you know the Italian justice ...). That is why passing to the referee would make the position of therock more secure, in freeing the money towards Coinfan."

Now, you might be wondering why I am concerned about the second part of the text that is highlighted in red when the first is clearly designed to intimidate Coinfan. Most of us would agree if a user uses an online translator such as Italian, Turkish, French etc and ends up posting on a wrong board or in the wrong place it is not a big issue. Any moderator with a bit of patience would never have made those not-so veiled threats to Coinfan or another user but tactic applied by both HostFat and eliale is the old carrot and stick technique.

They both say things within the same post that are quite strange in essence. In the above post for example where HostFat is threatening Coinfan, something else is also happening. Hostfat is defending Rock Trading and eliale by saying 35,000 EUR ($39,000) is nothing or is a small insignificant amount of money for Rock Trading but if they release the money back to Coinfan and it turns out Coinfan is a criminal then Rock Trading would get in trouble. That might well be true but when a moderator who happens to be an affiliate that is seeking money from the accused says it, there is a major conflict of interest. The reality was and still is Coinfan does not want FIAT, just wanted to get their crypto back but HostFat was very economical with the truth.

HostFat then goes on to say "the involvement of the referee (Arbiter) is the secure way to protect Rock Trading because eventually when eliale releases the crypto back to Coinfan it will be at the say-so of the Arbiter and if Coinfan is a criminal then nothing will happen to Rock Trading and eliale because they were instructed to do so by the Arbiter."

The Arbitration mechanism as well known by HostFat was triggered by Coinfan because once they were selective scammed by Rock Trading there was no way they would send anything to them. If it was FIAT related they would have but it was a crypto withdrawal which was denied even though the CTO Davide Barbieri (aka Paci Barbarossa) made it clear the KYC would not apply to anybody who wanted to withdraw crypto (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.0). HostFat knew all this and still sided with Rock Trading while pretending to be somewhat 'neutral' by playing ignorant.


5- The owner/operator of Rock Trading eliale posted the first name of Coinfan in the forum on several occasions without consent, thus breaching that trust. It was reckless thing to do because many others may start posting claiming to be "the real" victim of the scam. It was also an attempt to intimidate Coinfan by referring to the first name and gender in several posts.

Thanks to a user who post in the scam thead, I have copied the following:

The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) states https://eugdpr.org/the-regulation/gdpr-faqs/:

What constitutes personal data?
The GDPR applies to ‘personal data’, meaning any information relating to an identifiable person who can be directly or indirectly identified in particular by reference to an identifier. This definition provides for a wide range of personal identifiers to constitute personal data, including name, identification number, location data or online identifier, reflecting changes in technology and the way organizations collect information about people.

This means the owner/operator of a crypto/FIAT exchange called Rock Trading which is based in Italy within the European Union, has broken GDPR laws.

However, there should be no allegation of anybody posting the name of the owner of Rock Trading (which to my knowledge Coinfan did not) because yes myself and others did - including a user leaving it being in his feedback but this was not a breach of any trust because the owner of Rock Trading signed his own post as "Andrea Medri TRT CFO": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg44951057#msg44951057 and both eliale and paci give their real names, their aliases and their email addresses here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=894233.0

Who?
 
 - Andrea Medri (aka Eliale Morigi), CFO - andrea@therocktrading.com
 - Davide Barbieri (aka Paci Barbarossa), CTO - paci@therocktrading.com

Being a moderator, HostFat should have asked the owner/operator of Rock Trading (eliale) about why he was posting the name of a user/customer that was in dispute with his company over 35,000 EUR ($39,000) that was being withheld. HostFat chose to turn a blind-eye to that but the question arises why is HostFat desperately defending Rock Trading and eliale?

Is it really that simple that he has been operating on the Italian language board for so long that he feels he can do anything without consequences and with complete impunity?

Is it simply because he is an affiliate of Rock Trading and is getting affiliate fees (financial benefit and free web hosting for Bitcoin Foundation Italia) therefore it means he is unable to remain impartial and neutral in the very forum that he was supposed to moderate?



------------------------

In his feedback, eliale deliberately incorrectly states I am a paid mercenary and cites the wholly false and unacceptable comments by the Italian language board moderator HostFat as the rationale for it.

Rock Trading owner eliale has copied/pasted that link in various posts just to try to undermine the case Coinfan has lodged with Arbitration Team and to create misdirection to deflect attention away from the real issue which is that Rock Trading has tried to selective scam a customer to the value of 35,000 EURO ($39,000) but it backfired spectacularly because the user opened an English language and Italian language scam thread which resulted in the scam being exposed and being discussed openly by anybody and everybody from newbies to senior members of the community.

I think it is fair that HostFat is disciplined by the Bitcointalk Team and the post (where he made the false allegation against me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50341814#msg50341814) is edited or deleted.

Furthermore I would like an apology from HostFat (by virtue of him being in a privileged position of a moderator) because I have not taken money from Coinfan to raise the issue of Rock Trading scam. My signature has many scams listed that I want people to know about and be safe from.

I also think HostFat should apologise to Coinfan for falsely accusing them of paying me to raise the Rock Trading scam issue.

I also think HostFat should apologise to Coinfan for the disgusting and unacceptable attempt at bullying and intimidating by threatening to unfairly delete posts and possibly ban.

The conflict of interest between HostFat and Rock Trading (eliale) is blatantly obvious for everybody to see and the reasons for HostFat desperately defending Rock Trading and eliale should hopefully not be ignored by the Bitcointalk Team and the community in general.

Personally I feel that given what has been stated here, HostFat should no longer be a moderator on this great forum because he does not possess the required/expected attributes and etiquettes.

[1713928657]

1713928657

[1713928657]

1713928657

[1713928657]

1713928657

[Lauda]

I see nothing surprising here as this kind of behavior constitutes the very definition of the person behind the alias HostFat. It always did.

Personally I feel that given what has been stated here, HostFat should no longer be a moderator on this great forum because he does not possess the required/expected attributes and etiquettes.

Scammy exchange defended by a terrible moderator. Good luck with that.

[Quickseller]

It sounds like the basis for you saying there is unethical behavior is that HostFat is using a referral link in his signature for an exchange you believe is untrustworthy.

I don't think this reaches the point of it being necessary to take forum action.

[Coinfan]

JollyGood is an outstanding forum member, who constantly picks fights that aren't his fights to clean the forum from scammers. Just check how many forum scammers he gave negative feedback.

Of course, he has a lot of enemies and, therefore, he is an easy target for defamation.

He decided to support me on my fight against the blatantly illegal (I'm measuring my words, taking in account that the case is pending an arbitrage decision and it's going to be escalated soon) and covert block of the Rock Trading.

We became friends and I also decided to support him on some of his many fights I saw as worthy of my help. After I got negative feedback from a scammer accomplice for supporting JollyGood, he became even more supportive. He has been supporting me for 5 months. Obviously, I never paid him a cent.

Calling him a mercenary is something to be expected by Eliale (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=35172), the Rock Trading CFO, who has been on a lying spree to try to justify his block of my 35500 euro.

He blocked all my crypto withdrawals covertly on december 2017 and let me keep trading and depositing more money for 9 months without informing me of the block made under the pretext of an illegal verification, even if the Rock Trading TOS/FAQ says "verification isn't mandatory" (https://support.therocktrading.com/kb/faq.php?id=27).
 
There was no change of their TOS on the issue of verification.

The Rock CFO already wrote that he is ready to keep my money blocked "forever" under this pretext (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg47458158#msg47458158), he confessed he knows the money is mine but that if he loses the arbitrage case he isn't going to comply with the decision (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50017001#msg50017001) and that he is thinking of (abusively) suing me once he gets my identity (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50335179#msg50335179).

Of course, I have all reasons not to believe he would release my money and I'm not going to give him my documents since that would force me to battle on the Italian courts for more than 10 years until I finally ruin his case.

About HostFat, the facts are:
I) He is on a conflict of interests, since he is being paid by the italian Rock Trading Exchange each time the Rock gets a new customer thanks to his signature. Obviously, my threads affect this.

II) He posted allegations on my italian scam thread that not even the Rock CFO dared to post, saying that I could be a terrorist or a drug trader (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg47376154#msg47376154). I posted several times I earned my money on the Rock Trading, trading since 2012. He deleted one or two more posts he made, I don't recall their content. Of course, he has full right to free opinion about me.

III) An unknown moderator deleted 7 of my posts on 27 and 31 October 2018 on my main English scam thread and on my Italian thread. I wrote to HostFat about it, but he denied being responsible and wrote he didn't know who it was.

IV) On 27 March, HostFat removed all the posts about my case, including several of mine, from the Rock Trading main italian thread, which is entitled precisely Rock Trading "discussions and problems", where the Rock CFO were posting lies about my case, and transferred them to my thread on the much less known and read italian scam board, effectively "cleaning" the most exposed and important italian thread about the Rock (70% of their customers are Italian) from the negative publicity about this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791

V) On the same day, HostFat posted allegations against JollyGood and suggested that I had paid him: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50341814#msg50341814

VI) I made a new post with links to the posts removed and, again, he removed it from the main Rock italian thread and moved it to my thread on the italian scam board and prohibited me to post about the issue on the main rock thread with a threat of blocking my scam thread or requesting my ban: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50363454#msg50363454

VII) Again, on the same post, he raised suspicions on me, without explaining what the Rock would gain in security by demanding verification, when the European Commission and the Italian Arbitrator already received full personal details, including address and phone, backed by a document.

VIII) I already wrote to a superior of HostFat about his prohibition to post on the Rock italian main thread a summary of the Rock most recent and decisive declarations and I had no intention to make this public. But JollyGood deserves my backing on this defamation.

It's up to HostFat, who has the right to post his opinions and seemed to be restraining himself and avoiding censor my posts, to justify these acts and deny that any of them was made at the request or under influence of his economic relationship with the Rock Trading (whose CFO is now desperate, taking in account all the negative feedback he received).

But I still think that his removal of the posts and prohibition to post on the main italian Rock thread is abusive, as well as his threats to me.

I have full trust on the administration of this forum, that is a beacon on freedom of speech, and I'll respect their decision.

[hacker1001101001]

As a point of clarity, HostFat claims in his signature that Rock Trading has been "A good exchange since 2007" but we all know when Bitcoin was created. Andrea Medri (eliale) from Rock Trading himself stated several times that Rock Trading has been operating since 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50365334#msg50365334) so why HostFat needs to exaggerate the date of operation is a mystery.

This content on there website could explain it better.

Source: https://www.therocktrading.com/en

In the above text its clearly stated that the company was born in 2007 as "The Rock Insurance Co" and became an operation exchange in 2011 after the name changed to "The Rock Trading".

That means the statement "The Rock Trading : A good exchange since 2007." is surely some what over exaggerated for marketing and not upto the point. The exchange was basically in operation from 2011 not 2007.

I don't think there was anything crypto related operating before Satoshi Nakamoto's Great idea in 2009.

[r1s2g3]

It sounds like the basis for you saying there is unethical behavior is that HostFat is using a referral link in his signature for an exchange you believe is untrustworthy.

I don't think this reaches the point of it being necessary to take forum action.

As a moderator , he/she should distance from all the services that does not look fair.
Theymos removed Benson Samuel when hack incident happened on the exchange in which Benson was CEO though there are no evidences/allegations against Benson.

[Quickseller]

It sounds like the basis for you saying there is unethical behavior is that HostFat is using a referral link in his signature for an exchange you believe is untrustworthy.

I don't think this reaches the point of it being necessary to take forum action.

As a moderator , he/she should distance from all the services that does not look fair.
Theymos removed Benson Samuel when hack incident happened on the exchange in which Benson was CEO though there are no evidences/allegations against Benson.

wearing an affiliate link in his signature is different from running an exchange that is going to impose losses to their customers because what was ultimately his mistake.

[marlboroza]

III) An unknown moderator deleted 7 of my posts on 27 and 31 October 2018 on my main English scam thread and on my Italian thread. I wrote to HostFat about it, but he denied being responsible and wrote he didn't know who it was.

IV) On 27 March, HostFat removed all the posts about my case, including several of mine, from the Rock Trading main italian thread, which is entitled precisely Rock Trading "discussions and problems", where the Rock CFO were posting lies about my case, and transferred them to my thread on the much less known and read italian scam board, effectively "cleaning" the most exposed and important italian thread about the Rock (70% of their customers are Italian) from the negative publicity about this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791


VI) I made a new post with links to the posts removed and, again, he removed it from the main Rock italian thread and moved it to my thread on the italian scam board and prohibited me to post about the issue on the main rock thread with a threat of blocking my scam thread or requesting my ban: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50363454#msg50363454

Can you quote removed posts here?

[JollyGood]

I see nothing surprising here as this kind of behavior constitutes the very definition of the person behind the alias HostFat. It always did.

Personally I feel that given what has been stated here, HostFat should no longer be a moderator on this great forum because he does not possess the required/expected attributes and etiquettes.

Scammy exchange defended by a terrible moderator. Good luck with that.

Thank you for your comments.

I have no previous knowledge about HostFat and what reputation he might have had. My post here is based on my experience with him and my observation of him with the way he treated Coinfan.

In the end, it was something that had to be brought to the attention of the community and with it hopefully the Bitcointalk Team might decide it is time for HostFat to be removed as a moderator.

[HostFat]

In the italian section we have the "Accuse scam/truffe" section, and it is the section where all users can open "accusations" of scam to anyone.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=162.0

Coinfan has his discussion against therock here, where I did NOT delete/modified anything.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.0

He has then started to open his accusations of scam on the official discussion of therock here, which isn't allowed. (again, it isn't allowed to open scam accusation outside of "Accuse scam/truffe" section)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.0

I then moved all his messages from the official discussion of therocktrading in his discussion on the "accuse scam/truffe", and I left a message to notify everyone about this:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791

Ho spostato la parte della discussione di Coinfan nella sezione di accuse truffe, unita quindi alla discussione dedicata.
Per quell'argomento, si prosegue la.

English translation:
"I moved the Coinfan discussion part in the section accuse scams, then merged to the dedicated discussion.
For that topic, you have to continue on it"

Again, I did NOT delete/modified any messages from Coinfan that he wrote on the official discussion of therock, I moved them and merged them on his discussion on "Accuse scam/truffe"

After this, he (Coinfan) then AGAIN wrote a message on the official discussion of the rocktrading.

I did again NOT deleted his message, I moved it again on his discussion on the "Accuse scam/truffe", and I said that he should not do this again:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50363454#msg50363454


Here (this message), I'm not entering directly on the topic of the scam accusation of Coinfan. I'm not giving my opinion, do I have to?

[JollyGood]

In the italian section we have the "Accuse scam/truffe" section, and it is the section where all users can open "accusations" of scam to anyone.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=162.0

Coinfan has his discussion against therock here, where I did NOT delete/modified anything.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.0

He has then started to open his accusations of scam on the official discussion of therock here, which isn't allowed. (again, it isn't allowed to open scam accusation outside of "Accuse scam/truffe" section)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.0

I then moved all his messages from the official discussion of therocktrading in his discussion on the "accuse scam/truffe", and I left a message to notify everyone about this:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791

Ho spostato la parte della discussione di Coinfan nella sezione di accuse truffe, unita quindi alla discussione dedicata.
Per quell'argomento, si prosegue la.

English translation:
"I moved the Coinfan discussion part in the section accuse scams, then merged to the dedicated discussion.
For that topic, you have to continue on it"

Again, I did NOT delete/modified any messages from Coinfan that he wrote on the official discussion of therock, I moved them and merged them on his discussion on "Accuse scam/truffe"

After this, he (Coinfan) then AGAIN wrote a message on the official discussion of the rocktrading.

I did again NOT deleted his message, I moved it again on his discussion on the "Accuse scam/truffe", and I said that he should not do this again:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50363454#msg50363454


Here (this message), I'm not entering directly on the topic of the scam accusation of Coinfan. I'm not giving my opinion, do I have to?

JollyGood che ha scritto sopra, è un account usato per scrivere messaggi su pagamento, probabilmente pagato da Coinfan.

translation: "JollyGood, who wrote above, is an account used to write payment messages, probably paid by Coinfan"

I see no justification offered by HostFat to prove what he claimed. It was a wholly false and unsubstantiated allegation he made against me. He chose to not address that issue in the above post.

Can we have clarity please from anybody in the forum. Does anybody know what the exact relationship between HostFat and Rock Trading, paci and eliale is, beyond the financial benefits that HostFat receives from them by being an affiliate and from what I already stated in the OP?

[HostFat]

There are my opinions, and there are my actions as moderator.

My actions as moderator are consistent with the rules of the italian section, rules that are here by years.

I've NOT any affiliation with therocktrading (I've never had) other then the ref link on my signature that it is here by years.

More precisely, from the 2014
https://web.archive.org/web/20141010023220/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203
And, this is everything that I got from this ref link, from the 2014 to today.
https://i.imgur.com/j1qNf6H.png

For what it takes, I can even remove the ref link right now  

I haven't any money deposited on them, and I'm not using their services.


And about saying the year 2007 on my signature:
https://www.therocktrading.com/
"Born in 2007 as a Second Life virtual company, The Rock has evolved in a full featured digital institution incorporated in Europe. Founded by EU citizens, run by long-standing virtual worlds experts."
They are operating with cryptocurrencies from the 2011, but they are an exchange from the 2007. (anyway I didn't know about them at that time)

[Coinfan]

Can you quote removed posts here?

I don't recall what 7 posts were removed on October 2018.

The posts Hostfat removed and transfer started with this one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg49870790#msg49870790

and went on to this one:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50059485#msg50059485

40 posts.

And these 3 more:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50076205#msg50076205
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50123875#msg50123875
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50359033#msg50359033

So, 43 posts, from the Rock CFO, from me and several Rock customers, were removes and transferred.

The most damaging is the post where the Rock CFO, instead of recognizing he is acting illegally, wrote he is ready to do the same thing to any unverified customer even without changing their own TOS/FAQ:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5025233.msg50016475#msg50016475

Check translation and comment here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50060106#msg50060106


Hostfat didn't deny he removed all the posts and transferred them at the request of the Rock CFO.

There is no rule which prohibits to discuss a problem on a thread that is called "discussions and problems" about an exchange: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.0

Until they unblock my money, I'm still a customer. I have a problem, I have the right to discuss it on a thread about precisely these situations.

Is HosFat really claiming that there is a rule who forces to discuss the most serious problems only on the scam board? A customer can't complain on the main thread? At what grade of seriousness will the problem be buried on the scam board?

Where is that rule stated?

The fact that the customer opened a scam thread can't be used as excuse to remove the posts about the issue from the main thread unless they can be considered as spam.

The fact that the Rock CFO was engaged on that discussion (14 of the removed posts were from him!) confirms it wasn't spam and there was very important information posted by the Rock CFO that all their customers had a right to read.

Where his 14 posts spam?

The Rock CFO was lying about the situation with the intention to fool their customers reading the main thread. He gave his clear consent (if that was needed) to discuss the issue there. Do I had a duty to silently accept his lies?
 
"Cleaning" the main thread of all the posts about this issue and burying them on a much less visible scam board was objectively something very favorable to the Rock CFO who already has 11 negative feedback https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=35172 for his block of my money and a disfavor HosFat made to all their customers.

And his threats of blocking my scam thread and requesting my ban were abusive.

But this is in the trustworthy hands of the Administration of the Forum and they will decide whatever they think is correct.

[JollyGood]

There are my opinions, and there are my actions as moderator.

My actions as moderator are consistent with the rules of the italian section, rules that are here by years.

I've NOT any affiliation with therocktrading (I've never had) other then the ref link on my signature that it is here by years.

More precisely, from the 2014
https://web.archive.org/web/20141010023220/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=203
And, this is everything that I got from this ref link, from the 2014 to today.
https://i.imgur.com/j1qNf6H.png

For what it takes, I can even remove the ref link right now  

I haven't any money deposited on them, and I'm not using their services.


And about saying the year 2007 on my signature:
https://www.therocktrading.com/
"Born in 2007 as a Second Life virtual company, The Rock has evolved in a full featured digital institution incorporated in Europe. Founded by EU citizens, run by long-standing virtual worlds experts."
They are operating with cryptocurrencies from the 2011, but they are an exchange from the 2007. (anyway I didn't know about them at that time)

Remove the affiliate link or not, the damage is done.

How can a moderator justify posting in a scam thread to accuse a user of taking money to make negative posts about a third party?

Easy... he simply says it was his opinion in his personal capacity as a user of the forum and not a moderator yet he claims he is doing his job as a moderator when he threatens to ask for a ban on Coinfan - all the while he has been promoting the accused for years using his signature all on the SAME thread !

The evidence showing conflicts of interest stacks up heavily

[theymos]

III) An unknown moderator deleted 7 of my posts on 27 and 31 October 2018 on my main English scam thread and on my Italian thread. I wrote to HostFat about it, but he denied being responsible and wrote he didn't know who it was.

They were not deleted by HostFat. You were multi-posting.

IV) On 27 March, HostFat removed all the posts about my case, including several of mine, from the Rock Trading main italian thread, which is entitled precisely Rock Trading "discussions and problems", where the Rock CFO were posting lies about my case, and transferred them to my thread on the much less known and read italian scam board, effectively "cleaning" the most exposed and important italian thread about the Rock (70% of their customers are Italian) from the negative publicity about this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791

As far as I can tell, this appears to be within the realm of reasonable mod discretion regarding what's derailing a topic and what's not. The posts still exist, and HostFat mentioned them in the topic. HostFat denies any connection to The Rock Trading which would constitute a conflict of interest. (The ref link is very minor.)

Discussions about whether or not it was ideal for the topic to be split in this way would best take place in the Italian section, since it's impossible for someone who doesn't speak the language to get a feel for the flow of the conversation.

Again, on the same post, he raised suspicions on me

On the same day, HostFat posted allegations against JollyGood and suggested that I had paid him

He posted allegations on my italian scam thread that not even the Rock CFO dared to post,

First of all, you can see there is a signature, part of which states "The Rock Trading (ref): A good exchange since 2007."

These are not mod actions. He is entitled to his own opinions on the matter.

(Personally, from what I've read, I find The Rock Trading's behavior highly questionable. But it's debatable, especially when all of the details aren't known.)

I see nothing surprising here as this kind of behavior constitutes the very definition of the person behind the alias HostFat. It always did.

HostFat has moderated the Italian section for over 7 years, and I can recall few complaints and no unethical actions. I think that you're biased against him because of his support of BCH, and while I strongly disagree with him on that, I haven't seen any mod abuse related to this from him.

[Lauda]

I see nothing surprising here as this kind of behavior constitutes the very definition of the person behind the alias HostFat. It always did.

HostFat has moderated the Italian section for over 7 years, and I can recall few complaints and no unethical actions. I think that you're biased against him because of his support of BCH, and while I strongly disagree with him on that, I haven't seen any mod abuse related to this from him.

I was referring to the Roger Ver DT shenanigans i.e. abuse of position, not necessarily his moderator position. I'll leave it at that as this would deviate from the topic on hand.

[eliale]

III) An unknown moderator deleted 7 of my posts on 27 and 31 October 2018 on my main English scam thread and on my Italian thread. I wrote to HostFat about it, but he denied being responsible and wrote he didn't know who it was.

They were not deleted by HostFat. You were multi-posting.

IV) On 27 March, HostFat removed all the posts about my case, including several of mine, from the Rock Trading main italian thread, which is entitled precisely Rock Trading "discussions and problems", where the Rock CFO were posting lies about my case, and transferred them to my thread on the much less known and read italian scam board, effectively "cleaning" the most exposed and important italian thread about the Rock (70% of their customers are Italian) from the negative publicity about this issue: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=330856.msg50341791#msg50341791

As far as I can tell, this appears to be within the realm of reasonable mod discretion regarding what's derailing a topic and what's not. The posts still exist, and HostFat mentioned them in the topic. HostFat denies any connection to The Rock Trading which would constitute a conflict of interest. (The ref link is very minor.)

Discussions about whether or not it was ideal for the topic to be split in this way would best take place in the Italian section, since it's impossible for someone who doesn't speak the language to get a feel for the flow of the conversation.

Again, on the same post, he raised suspicions on me

On the same day, HostFat posted allegations against JollyGood and suggested that I had paid him

He posted allegations on my italian scam thread that not even the Rock CFO dared to post,

First of all, you can see there is a signature, part of which states "The Rock Trading (ref): A good exchange since 2007."

These are not mod actions. He is entitled to his own opinions on the matter.

(Personally, from what I've read, I find The Rock Trading's behavior highly questionable. But it's debatable, especially when all of the details aren't known.)

I see nothing surprising here as this kind of behavior constitutes the very definition of the person behind the alias HostFat. It always did.

HostFat has moderated the Italian section for over 7 years, and I can recall few complaints and no unethical actions. I think that you're biased against him because of his support of BCH, and while I strongly disagree with him on that, I haven't seen any mod abuse related to this from him.

Thank you.

just for everybody information, we are following what our lawyers are telling us in order to be in compliance with the law.  The OP has another opinion? Ok, we asked her multiple times to open a case with the authorities and let them decide who is right.

As of now, it seems that the OP filed a request with an Italian Arbitrator which, in our opinion, is a very good idea.  Up to now, we have no news from the arbitrator so we asked the OP to request an update.

In conclusion, we all have to wait for the arbitrator to contact us and solve the situation.

If, by any chance, by the end of this month we won't have any reply (which is impossible if the OP opened a case), we will file a police report in order to open an official investigation about this case.


Regards

PS: from 2007 till 2011, TRT was only a role game playing platform in Second Life and had no legal connection in the real world.  Second Life is a private company and it is fully ruling all activities inside their platform.

[JollyGood]

As a point of clarity, HostFat claims in his signature that Rock Trading has been "A good exchange since 2007" but we all know when Bitcoin was created. Andrea Medri (eliale) from Rock Trading himself stated several times that Rock Trading has been operating since 2011 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4975753.msg50365334#msg50365334) so why HostFat needs to exaggerate the date of operation is a mystery.

This content on there website could explain it better.

Source: https://www.therocktrading.com/en

In the above text its clearly stated that the company was born in 2007 as "The Rock Insurance Co" and became an operation exchange in 2011 after the name changed to "The Rock Trading".

That means the statement "The Rock Trading : A good exchange since 2007." is surely some what over exaggerated for marketing and not upto the point. The exchange was basically in operation from 2011 not 2007.

I don't think there was anything crypto related operating before Satoshi Nakamoto's Great idea in 2009.

Thank you for post, it clarifies some of the confusion.

[Coinfan]

The Administrator decided this issue. This issue ended. But it won't be forgotten.

Theymos, thanks for your opinion:

(Personally, from what I've read, I find The Rock Trading's behavior highly questionable. But it's debatable, especially when all of the details aren't known.)

I hope I can quote you. All details are available in the quick summary on my OP (on my signature).