@THEYMOS Abusive group punished DT1 for speaking up against them

[Lauda]

Your word is dirt. Only a fucking eastern euro trash pleb like you would not realize that pajeethunter is something you would call someone who hunts pajeets like you and your group of gutter rats.

He is a pajeet(hunter), he doesn't actually hunt pajeets.

[1714811828]

1714811828

[1714811828]

1714811828

[1714811828]

1714811828

[1714811828]

1714811828

[1714811828]

1714811828

[Thule]

Your word is dirt. Only a fucking eastern euro trash pleb like you would not realize that pajeethunter is something you would call someone who hunts pajeets like you and your group of gutter rats.

He is a pajeet(hunter), he doesn't actually hunt pajeets.

Have a look at this loser who needs to hide.
Dirt who needs to scam people.
Some ego issues calling himself diffrent names.

Something like you is called human garbage.

I bet you are the loser in your family.

[The-One-Above-All]

Your word is dirt. Only a fucking eastern euro trash pleb like you would not realize that pajeethunter is something you would call someone who hunts pajeets like you and your group of gutter rats.

He is a pajeet(hunter), he doesn't actually hunt pajeets.

He's a crypto, he doesn't actually hunt crypto? okay well if you say so.... but..

He hunts you, therefore he hunts pajeets. Dirty sig spamming bunch of retards. Imagine dumping your dark scam coins before they went parabolic you dumb fool haha. All those years lying to scam innocent investors into buying that premined scam coin and you go and unload too early. LOL . Now need to extort people and pull shady escrows. What a loser whilst a real legend like cryptohunter invested in nxt day after it released, a nem stake holder, picked 6 of the top 10 in the last bull run and made a bunch of millionaires from nothing. You're still here trying to scheme and scam no doubt. Lying again just now in public and failing to bring any evidence to corroborate your crap. What a pajeet loser.

Shhh pajeet go try bully some other sniveling cowards into backing your double standards lies and scamming shit. We will be here ready to bring it all up over and over and over and over again.

It has not dawned on you yet but there is no way for us to lose. We already made it. Can sit here forever just pulling you apart forever just for fun. Where are those fun lauda links demonstrating what a scum bag you are.. we like to post. One minute we pull them all up and bitch slap you around with them again. Then LFC blowjobqueen can come and ease your pain.

[Lauda]

Is that all you've got? You're quite the pajeet scammer, making me bored. Two baboons, pajeet-thule and pajeet-cryptohunter. Do you like the spelling now? Actual pajeets have more money than CH. Ok.

[The-One-Above-All]

Is that all you've got? You're quite the pajeet scammer, making me bored. Two baboons, pajeet-thule and pajeet-cryptohunter. Do you like the spelling now? Actual pajeets have more money than CH. Ok.

Sounds like some croatian dog yapping away with no teeth, that's just your mother though... Where are your observable instances or evidence? oh there is none you dumb piece of 3rd world trash.

LOL spewing lies with no evidence. Typical euro trash garbage. I imagine you were like locked in some rancid euro trash shit hole cage as a child with your putrid sister standing there teasing you with... " you will never geet this, you will never geet this" haha

We like this one

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5131477.msg50628003#msg50628003

this one with vod open admitting you and your fellow dumb shit gang that have been allowed to infest dt crush his cowardly ability to red trust you

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5137144.msg50915510#msg50915510

Too much evidence to support you being a lying scamming dirty piece of shit now for it to fade away. You have NOTHING ,NO EVIDENCE to support your claims. lies haha

This latest admission from LTC bitchcoward is another nice piece to throw in with VOD's admissions over and over and over.

You feel cocky because theymos seems to favor you. So what, this is an open forum the truth can not be concealed. Your history here is there in black and white for all to read. We archived it all just in case there is some strange server issue where it gets lost.

[El duderino_]

I made the "crime" public (to use your analogy), so that there is not another victim, or a continued victim.

I never said LFC was intimidating me, and my words being twisted or misconstrued is becoming quite a pattern.
Obviously my point is that Lauda is intimidating people, and operating with a mafia (pardon the cliche) mentality of silence or you'll get whacked isn't helping.

I didn't claim that LFC was intimidating you, I claimed that Lauda was intimidating LFC, LFC let you know, and you broke a more about trust and private messages. If someone gets scammed, you don't post the scammed person's address to take down the scammer.

Just let it be known there are those unspoken rules, codes of honour or whatever its been called ..... exposing a private message falls under them.

[SaltySpitoon]

this thread has been up for 6 years, and it very clearly says to publish PM logs if you are making a scam accusation.

There is no reason why you should expect privacy if you send a PM unencrypted. Period.

I will repeat myself that if you don’t want a PM published in which you said something embarrassing, you should not send a PM containing something embarrassing.

Why should you expect a PM to be private if its encrypted? I expect you'd give the receiver a way to unencrypt the message as its intended for them. What prevents them from posting it after unencrypting it? I also don't see anything about posting your own sensitive information in the scam report format. The whole basis of the argument is that Bill could have handled this better. They could have said the same thing they wanted about Lauda without calling out the person who gave them the information, that explicitly stated that they weren't saying it publicly because they were afraid of retribution.

Just let it be known there are those unspoken rules, codes of honour or whatever its been called ..... exposing a private message falls under them.

While Bill may not agree, I'm sure it has become clear at this point that a fair number of people agree with this sentiment. People of sound mind are able to put aside their personal beliefs for the sake of reasonably interacting with other humans, ie not spitting in people's hand during a handshake, or holding back offensive language when talking with certain people even if its part of your normal vernacular.

Its not like talking some some of the bricks here that you could spend all day trying to convince that the sky is blue, but it would never sink in.

[The-One-Above-All]

this thread has been up for 6 years, and it very clearly says to publish PM logs if you are making a scam accusation.

There is no reason why you should expect privacy if you send a PM unencrypted. Period.

I will repeat myself that if you don’t want a PM published in which you said something embarrassing, you should not send a PM containing something embarrassing.

Why should you expect a PM to be private if its encrypted? I expect you'd give the receiver a way to unencrypt the message as its intended for them. What prevents them from posting it after unencrypting it? I also don't see anything about posting your own sensitive information in the scam report format. The whole basis of the argument is that Bill could have handled this better. They could have said the same thing they wanted about Lauda without calling out the person who gave them the information, that explicitly stated that they weren't saying it publicly because they were afraid of retribution.

Just let it be known there are those unspoken rules, codes of honour or whatever its been called ..... exposing a private message falls under them.

While Bill may not agree, I'm sure it has become clear at this point that a fair number of people agree with this sentiment. People of sound mind are able to put aside their personal beliefs for the sake of reasonably interacting with other humans, ie not spitting in people's hand during a handshake, or holding back offensive language when talking with certain people even if its part of your normal vernacular.

Its not like talking some some of the bricks here that you could spend all day trying to convince that the sky is blue, but it would never sink in.

That would depend on how convincing your arguments were. Like for instance the crap you tried to push that liking lemons is a valid reason for red trust.  Most of your reasoning is highly questionable verging on ridiculous. When people tie you down to a debate you run off. This could be why the people likely smarter than you are not convinced by your ill thought out opinions most of the time. I have NEVER seen you come out opposing the scammers and liars here yet. For that reason I view you and your motives as dubious and untrustworthy or at best you are a coward hedging your bets. Either way the question is

why on this thread specifically about double standards and DT intimidating others are you focusing on this 2ndary and possibly off topic point about sharing a PM? that clearly demonstrates there is intimidation and gang tactics at least in lfc bitches mind. 

Is lauda and his gang intimidating others? is he a liar? do you think he tried to extort people? how about his shady escrow?  is bill more untrustworthy than lauda for instance in your lemons opinion? also I heard lauda rubs lemon juice on his asshole before lfc bitcoin rims it (if lfc has been particularly good that day) ? surely that makes them far more untrustworthy right? which of the 2 if you could only pick one would you view as more dangerous to this board? lauda or bill?

Try for once not sneakily finding away to protect the real scammers and liars here.  These people are scum. Help get rid of them or you are part of the problem.

Surely you are not that crazy to believe "saying" someone told you that they are scared of the gang carries anything like the weight of the actual message are you? please stop posting this drivel. Start getting back on topic and saying yes it does look like there are clear double standards ie the nutildah/bill , yes it is obvious lauda and his bunch of scum use red trust to silence whistleblowers, yes there is clear intimidation and manipulation. Man up salty stop being a snide scam supporter.

Yes posting a private pm from someone who is apologizing about fucking you over because they are scared is a bit unsavory, however let's bring into focus and see how small of an issue this is compared to the a group of scammers and liars using dt to control free speech here.

[actmyname]

I read through this thread.

... ^{s_igh. _***}Yet another pointless topic.

We have:
Another @theymos thread
Nominal hearsay evidence being used as concrete proof of malice
Keyboard raging. Deflection. Reflection. Confections.    
Empty threats. Insults. Blanket statements.
Rhetoric. Pretend arguments. Ad-hominem attacks.Don't you get tired of the egotistical masturbation?

[SaltySpitoon]

That would depend on how convincing your arguments were. Like for instance the crap you tried to push that liking lemons is a valid reason for red trust.  Most of your reasoning is highly questionable verging on ridiculous. When people tie you down to a debate you run off. This could be why the people likely smarter than you are not convinced by your ill thought out opinions most of the time. I have NEVER seen you come out opposing the scammers and liars here yet. For that reason I view you and your motives as dubious and untrustworthy or at best you are a coward hedging your bets. Either way the question is

why on this thread specifically about double standards and DT intimidating others are you focusing on this 2ndary and possibly off topic point about sharing a PM? that clearly demonstrates there is intimidation and gang tactics at least in lfc bitches mind.  

Is lauda and his gang intimidating others? is he a liar? do you think he tried to extort people? how about his shady escrow?  is bill more untrustworthy than lauda for instance in your lemons opinion? also I heard lauda rubs lemon juice on his asshole before lfc bitcoin rims it (if lfc has been particularly good that day) ? surely that makes them far more untrustworthy right? which of the 2 if you could only pick one would you view as more dangerous to this board? lauda or bill?

Try for once not sneakily finding away to protect the real scammers and liars here.  These people are scum. Help get rid of them or you are part of the problem.

Surely you are not that crazy to believe "saying" someone told you that they are scared of the gang carries anything like the weight of the actual message are you? please stop posting this drivel. Start getting back on topic and saying yes it does look like there are clear double standards ie the nutildah/bill , yes it is obvious lauda and his bunch of scum use red trust to silence whistleblowers, yes there is clear intimidation and manipulation. Man up salty stop being a snide scam supporter.

Yes posting a private pm from someone who is apologizing about fucking you over because they are scared is a bit unsavory, however let's bring into focus and see how small of an issue this is compared to the a group of scammers and liars using dt to control free speech here.

Look CH, my point about lemons is that anyone can leave anyone feedback for any reason. Feedback means absolutely nothing without a reason that others accept. I don't accept negative feedback for account buying. You don't accept negative feedback from the group of people you dislike, thats all I meant. I could leave you negative feedback for liking lemons, and people would simply disregard my feedback, that is how the system works. For that reason, it doesn't matter if people leave you stupid negative feedback as long as its honest. I can't leave you negative feedback saying you scammed me if you didnt, but I can leave you negative feedback for having hyphens if your name if I so desired, people would just disregard it. The way the system is set up is that if you leave feedback that the majority of people disregard, then your feedback is useless and you don't deserve to be on DT, eventually you'll be removed, and the problem fixes itself.

I don't care about what Lauda does, because I don't think it matters. They can try to be a trust bully if they want, as I said before, this is entirely about hurt feelings. Show me a business owner or any individual marketplace goer who has had their sales unreasonably hurt by Lauda or anyone else for this matter, and I'll start to care. For that matter, show me how you have been effected in any way since becoming a target of Lauda and gang?  I've had pms from Lauda asking me to do things, I've had others ask me to do things about Lauda, I'm not interested in getting into online fights with people I don't know and will never meet.

Who is more dangerous to the board? Neither of them, they are both inconsequential to "the board". They are having a personal spat that in no way effects the Bitcoin forum in any way. I don't care about double standards, they don't matter because this is a private forum, no one is entitled to a fair anything. You can't regulate personal relationships between hundreds of thousands of users.

Do I care about scammers? Somewhat. Do I care about liars? If I'm not trading with them, not really.  Do I care about trust "abusers"? We have very different definitions of trust abuse. Your definition, not in the slightest. By my definition, somewhat. Just to be clear, I don't support anyone here. I have two or three pals that I know in real life that use this forum that I care about then there are a handful of people here that I enjoy having conversations with, and people that I wish the best for, but I don't "support" them. I have no different impression of Bill than I have with you, Lauda, or almost anyone else in this thread.  

You are all taking yourself way too seriously. Nothing will happen if Lauda is free to pretend to have some sort of weight to throw around, nothing will happen if you complain about it. If Lauda and cronies find their way into the forum database let me know.

[The-One-Above-All]

That would depend on how convincing your arguments were. Like for instance the crap you tried to push that liking lemons is a valid reason for red trust.  Most of your reasoning is highly questionable verging on ridiculous. When people tie you down to a debate you run off. This could be why the people likely smarter than you are not convinced by your ill thought out opinions most of the time. I have NEVER seen you come out opposing the scammers and liars here yet. For that reason I view you and your motives as dubious and untrustworthy or at best you are a coward hedging your bets. Either way the question is

why on this thread specifically about double standards and DT intimidating others are you focusing on this 2ndary and possibly off topic point about sharing a PM? that clearly demonstrates there is intimidation and gang tactics at least in lfc bitches mind.  

Is lauda and his gang intimidating others? is he a liar? do you think he tried to extort people? how about his shady escrow?  is bill more untrustworthy than lauda for instance in your lemons opinion? also I heard lauda rubs lemon juice on his asshole before lfc bitcoin rims it (if lfc has been particularly good that day) ? surely that makes them far more untrustworthy right? which of the 2 if you could only pick one would you view as more dangerous to this board? lauda or bill?

Try for once not sneakily finding away to protect the real scammers and liars here.  These people are scum. Help get rid of them or you are part of the problem.

Surely you are not that crazy to believe "saying" someone told you that they are scared of the gang carries anything like the weight of the actual message are you? please stop posting this drivel. Start getting back on topic and saying yes it does look like there are clear double standards ie the nutildah/bill , yes it is obvious lauda and his bunch of scum use red trust to silence whistleblowers, yes there is clear intimidation and manipulation. Man up salty stop being a snide scam supporter.

Yes posting a private pm from someone who is apologizing about fucking you over because they are scared is a bit unsavory, however let's bring into focus and see how small of an issue this is compared to the a group of scammers and liars using dt to control free speech here.

Look CH, my point about lemons is that anyone can leave anyone feedback for any reason. Feedback means absolutely nothing without a reason that others accept. I don't accept negative feedback for account buying. You don't accept negative feedback from the group of people you dislike, thats all I meant. I could leave you negative feedback for liking lemons, and people would simply disregard my feedback, that is how the system works. For that reason, it doesn't matter if people leave you stupid negative feedback as long as its honest. I can't leave you negative feedback saying you scammed me if you didnt, but I can leave you negative feedback for having hyphens if your name if I so desired, people would just disregard it. The way the system is set up is that if you leave feedback that the majority of people disregard, then your feedback is useless and you don't deserve to be on DT, eventually you'll be removed, and the problem fixes itself.

I don't care about what Lauda does, because I don't think it matters. They can try to be a trust bully if they want, as I said before, this is entirely about hurt feelings. Show me a business owner or any individual marketplace goer who has had their sales unreasonably hurt by Lauda or anyone else for this matter, and I'll start to care. For that matter, show me how you have been effected in any way since becoming a target of Lauda and gang?  I've had pms from Lauda asking me to do things, I've had others ask me to do things about Lauda, I'm not interested in getting into online fights with people I don't know and will never meet.

Who is more dangerous to the board? Neither of them, they are both inconsequential to "the board". They are having a personal spat that in no way effects the Bitcoin forum in any way. I don't care about double standards, they don't matter because this is a private forum, no one is entitled to a fair anything. You can't regulate personal relationships between hundreds of thousands of users.

Do I care about scammers? Somewhat. Do I care about liars? If I'm not trading with them, not really.  Do I care about trust "abusers"? We have very different definitions of trust abuse. Your definition, not in the slightest. By my definition, somewhat. Just to be clear, I don't support anyone here. I have two or three pals that I know in real life that use this forum that I care about then there are a handful of people here that I enjoy having conversations with, and people that I wish the best for, but I don't "support" them. I have no different impression of Bill than I have with you, Lauda, or almost anyone else in this thread.  

You are all taking yourself way too seriously. Nothing will happen if Lauda is free to pretend to have some sort of weight to throw around, nothing will happen if you complain about it. If Lauda and cronies find their way into the forum database let me know.

Let's try this...

1. If you left me red trust for liking lemons then
a/ browsers of this forum not logged in would see a message strongly suggesting I am a scammer.
b/ people reading my posts who do not go to the trust page will likely assume I am a scammer.
c/ If everyone leaves random red for things not related to scamming the trust score is no longer helpful against scammers
d/ People are not removed and it does not fix itself as far as we can see under the new system.

2 trust bullying has HUGE and far reaching implications for free speech. It is undeniable and crazy to say it does not matter. Unless you do not care about free speech.

trust bullying allows DT members to punish whistle blowers which obviously facilitates scammers.
the message from LTC that was revealed demonstrates his actions were that of someone intimidated and scared to do what he thought was the right thing. This again facilitates scamming and influences a persons right to behave how they feel they should.

3/ Well you can see how LFC was effected. Now bill will be effected in a different way to nutildah. We have not been effected since we refuse to be pushed about by this kind of lying scammer and his grubby little clan. It is quite reasonable to believe many others behaviors are effected in the same way.  Thule and others have been effected since their ability to earn from sigs (like you do) is now taken away. What if they needed that money?

4. Wrong. Lauda has proven he is far more dangerous. The sheer number of instances of him being directly involved or implicated in untrustworthy and scamming behaviors of course endangers people on this forum. How can it not? What if they find out who you are and threaten to doxx you if you don't pay up? what if they lie to you about the initial distribution of a project and the colluding instaminers dump it all crushing your investment to zero?  what if they decide to try to benefit from your funds you trust them with for escrow and they lose it all trying to gain from some fork?  this is dangerous for the entire board and the reputation of the entire forum? what if you spoke out about an observable instance of they lying or scamming and they all red trust you?  we feel you may sing a different tune.

5. Don't care about double standards? nobody is entitled to anything fair? so you would elect people to positions of power and trust and not care if they dole out double standards and are observably unfair? this leads to corruption, scamming and a toxic environment here. People naturally want things to be fair. Double standards are sickening.

6. You do care about scammers ( a little bit)? so scamming as in lying or deceiving others for financial gain? you accept this is the definition of scamming?

7. You don't care about liars unless you trade with them personally? but do care if someone shares a pm they did not promise to keep secret? just trying to get a feel for the mind of SS here.

8. You don't care in the slightest about people using red trust to silence or attempt to silence whistle blowers? which obviously increases the probability of people getting scammed? or using red trust to gain support for their agendas? this a legitimate use of red trust to you?

Having said all of this we are more convinced you are just a bit of a strange individual perhaps rather than an ardent supporter of scammers and liars. Perhaps there is hope for SS. Perhaps just needs to be nailed down to a full debate and reprogrammed a little bit. You seem to be only able to consider what you consider are direct consequences. The world is not that simple I'm afraid. There are far reaching and very damaging consequences for the thing you say you do not care about at all.

[Quickseller]

this thread has been up for 6 years, and it very clearly says to publish PM logs if you are making a scam accusation.

There is no reason why you should expect privacy if you send a PM unencrypted. Period.

I will repeat myself that if you don’t want a PM published in which you said something embarrassing, you should not send a PM containing something embarrassing.

Why should you expect a PM to be private if its encrypted? I expect you'd give the receiver a way to unencrypt the message as its intended for them. What prevents them from posting it after unencrypting it? I also don't see anything about posting your own sensitive information in the scam report format. The whole basis of the argument is that Bill could have handled this better. They could have said the same thing they wanted about Lauda without calling out the person who gave them the information, that explicitly stated that they weren't saying it publicly because they were afraid of retribution.

I think the point is more that encrypting a PM is a way to signal that you wish for the information to remain private, and providing an encryption key is a way to signal that you agree to keep encrypted information private.

If you send me information, unsolicited and unencrypted, there should be no reason to believe I will keep said information confidential because that is not something I agreed to do.

Similarly, if you send me bitcoin, unsolicited, to the address in my profile, there should be no expectation that I will return it to you upon your request -- I would return it to you, if I can and if I reasonably believe it was sent to me in error, but if I cannot access the money because of a lack of backups, I did not properly keep the private keys safe from malware, or hackers, if the address belongs to a charity, or to some third party or some other similar reason, I am not going to dip into my own pocket to send money back to you because I did not agree to safeguard your money, nor did I have the opportunity to negotiate the terms of doing so. (I have not ever posted that anyone can "just send" bitcoin to the address in my profile).

If you had contacted me, saying that you want to provide sensitive information that you want kept confidential, I would have the opportunity to either promise to keep the information secret or to negotiate other terms to safeguard the information, including under what circumstances, if any, it can be disclosed. If you just send me information, unsolicited and unencrypted, I have no way of knowing your desire for confidentiality, and since I have not agreed to keep the information secret, by default would be willing to disclose the information if the information is relevant to a discussion.  In regards to the message Bill Gator received, I don't see evidence he either agreed to keep the message confidential, nor did I see the desire it be kept confidential in the body of the message. 

The reason why you would send me a Personal message is because you specifically want me to see it. If you post something to me in the altcoin section, I can almost guarantee I will not see the message. If you post a message to me in another section, I may not ever see it, or it may be a long time before I see it.

[SaltySpitoon]

Let's try this...

1. If you left me red trust for liking lemons then
a/ browsers of this forum not logged in would see a message strongly suggesting I am a scammer.
b/ people reading my posts who do not go to the trust page will likely assume I am a scammer.
c/ If everyone leaves random red for things not related to scamming the trust score is no longer helpful against scammers
d/ People are not removed and it does not fix itself as far as we can see under the new system.

a. Browsers of the forum not logged in, who's opinions don't matter in the slightest would see a warning saying that someone has given you negative feedback.
b. Who cares? Are you doing business with them? If so would they not look at your feedback, if not, why care what other people who have no interaction with you think? I think you are a 9 meter tall purple dragon, do you need to prove me wrong about that?
c. Who is to judge what is related to scamming? The users that read your feedback. Maybe lemon hate is part of my fanatical religious belief, and other lemon haters out there need to know your preferences on lemons. Those that agree with me about lemons will take my warning to heart, and those that think I'm a nut job will ignore it.
d. Just because its not working the way you'd like doesn't mean its not working. There are some new interesting developments with DT, but I don't think it has yet stopped serving its intended purpose. People are just fighting over DT ratings while those actually trading continue to operate as normal, completely detached from who left someone feedback for lemons and who is a jerk.

2 trust bullying has HUGE and far reaching implications for free speech. It is undeniable and crazy to say it does not matter. Unless you do not care about free speech.

trust bullying allows DT members to punish whistle blowers which obviously facilitates scammers.
the message from LTC that was revealed demonstrates his actions were that of someone intimidated and scared to do what he thought was the right thing. This again facilitates scamming and influences a persons right to behave how they feel they should.

I do not. As apparent, people say whatever they want regardless of trust bullying. Some people make alts, others send private messages to tip off others. Choosing not to speak up is a choice. Come on now, we are talking about forum politics, no one has your family kidnapped. Lauda can't actually whack you if you speak out against them, and it sure would be awful if they gave you frivolous negative feedback that would help you further your point. Free speech does not mean that you can say whatever you want without people responding however they see fit. Freedom of speech is to protect you from the government for saying something they don't like, not to do whatever you want on an online forum without people getting mad at you.

3/ Well you can see how LFC was effected. Now bill will be effected in a different way to nutildah. We have not been effected since we refuse to be pushed about by this kind of lying scammer and his grubby little clan. It is quite reasonable to believe many others behaviors are effected in the same way.  Thule and others have been effected since their ability to earn from sigs (like you do) is now taken away. What if they needed that money?

Not really, still just looks like everyone has hurt feelings. What has your refusal to be pushed around accomplished besides spam? I'm not saying you are wrong to stand up for yourself, but what possible damage could have been done? I just think you are wasting your time. Just saying, "yeah whatever man" when Lauda goes on a power trip is just as effective as spending 120 hours composing posts about how outraged you are.  Why has their ability to earn from sigs been taken away? Does every single campaign operator value Lauda's feedback?

4. Wrong. Lauda has proven he is far more dangerous. The sheer number of instances of him being directly involved or implicated in untrustworthy and scamming behaviors of course endangers people on this forum. How can it not? What if they find out who you are and threaten to doxx you if you don't pay up? what if they lie to you about the initial distribution of a project and the colluding instaminers dump it all crushing your investment to zero?  what if they decide to try to benefit from your funds you trust them with for escrow and they lose it all trying to gain from some fork?  this is dangerous for the entire board and the reputation of the entire forum? what if you spoke out about an observable instance of they lying or scamming and they all red trust you?  we feel you may sing a different tune.

What if Lauda comes to my house and pisses in my cheerios? What do I do if they threaten to dox me if I don't pay up? I suppose I'd contact an admin or global moderator. Illegal activities result in bans here. If your investment is so shaky that a lie from Lauda can ruin it, you are an idiot for investing in it. If I had a bunch of red trust tomorrow and for whatever reason it was all staged perfectly so that I couldn't refute it, I'd ask MinerJones to escrow for me when I make trades here.

5. Don't care about double standards? nobody is entitled to anything fair? so you would elect people to positions of power and trust and not care if they dole out double standards and are observably unfair? this leads to corruption, scamming and a toxic environment here. People naturally want things to be fair. Double standards are sickening.

I don't acknowledge DT as a position of power. It sucks that things aren't fair, thats how the world works. All of these rights and fair things you keep talking about are government guaranteed rights to protect you from systematic abuse. The government doesn't have the right to say, alright you plagiarized so your life is over, but your account can be banned for that reason. You don't have a whole lot of recourse if someone decides to pick a fight with you on an internet forum, as long as its within the rules.

6. You do care about scammers ( a little bit)? so scamming as in lying or deceiving others for financial gain? you accept this is the definition of scamming?

Fraudulently obtaining money from someone, with cash or cash equivalent changing hands.

7. You don't care about liars unless you trade with them personally? but do care if someone shares a pm they did not promise to keep secret? just trying to get a feel for the mind of SS here.

Do you know how many people on this forum have killed another human? Do you know how many have committed actual serious crimes and have never been caught? I don't know either, but if you care too much about everything around you, you'll drive yourself crazy. Everyone on the internet is a liar to some extent. My real name isn't SaltySpitoon! I casually sprinkle a lie into my posts now and then, I don't actually believe you are a 9 meter tall dragon, and I used my measurement in terms of meters to possibly imply that I don't live in the U.S! I'm not going to worry about things outside an immediate sphere of feasible threats. Sharing a PM is a behavior I find untrustworthy, to me it means that someone doesn't respect a user's privacy. When I'm buying or selling something here, I use my real name. I am under the assumption that with reasonable people, they will not act in a spiteful manner such as releasing my information if I do not prompt them to do so, for example by scamming them.

8. You don't care in the slightest about people using red trust to silence or attempt to silence whistle blowers? which obviously increases the probability of people getting scammed? or using red trust to gain support for their agendas? this a legitimate use of red trust to you?

Nope, because for the past years that I've been trading here, that hasn't seemed to occur.

Having said all of this we are more convinced you are just a bit of a strange individual perhaps rather than an ardent supporter of scammers and liars. Perhaps there is hope for SS. Perhaps just needs to be nailed down to a full debate and reprogrammed a little bit. You seem to be only able to consider what you consider are direct consequences. The world is not that simple I'm afraid. There are far reaching and very damaging consequences for the thing you say you do not care about at all.

Not interested in any brainwashing you are attempting. I've been a member here for 8 years, and was a moderator for ~5 years. I've got a pretty decent idea of how things have worked around here, where the troubles were, and how they were fixed. I really don't mean this as a insult, but if this isn't all just a game to you, I pity you. I'm sure there is so much more going on right now that you could use your time productively for. In the grander scheme of things, this is just as stupid as getting into a month long fight with someone on Reddit that insults your mother. None of this has any meaningful impact on you, rise above the forum bullshit and reclaim your time.

As for me, I've got a couple of days off and nothing better to do, so here I am! But, I'll go back to ignoring your long rambly posts that inspire me to write equally long rambly posts soon.


This is my TLDR:

Who cares about what people on the internet do or think, worry about real problems. If you don't have more pressing problems, I guess good for you? Getting spun up at every provocation and atrocity committed against you is not the way to go.

Also:

Don't you get tired of the egotistical masturbation?

*edit*

-snip-
If you send me information, unsolicited and unencrypted, there should be no reason to believe I will keep said information confidential because that is not something I agreed to do.
-snip-

Good to know.

[TECSHARE]

So the IRS potentially kicking in your door is not a significant consequence? Everyone here likes to imagine this forum is just like a video game with no real world consequences. The fact is many people depend on this forum for income and this mob behavior can and does do damage to ones ability to trade here. This place is so rife with fraud building up a reputation is not an easy or quick task. It takes time, money, risk, and effort to build your reputation here just for it to be destroyed in an instant in retaliation for criticizing the wrong people. You poo poo at the idea and say people will just ignore invalid ratings and the like, but who actually takes the time to validate these ratings? Almost no one, and the ones who most need to are the least likely and the most populous. In effect this has serious repercussions on ones ability to solicit trade here among other real world consequences imposed by these control freaks.

[Foxpup]

This is ridiculous. I've defied Lauda lots of times and I've never been punished, at least not too severely.

Also why people assume you are female is unclear.

It's perfectly clear. None of those people are invited to our felching orgies and the few who are understand that Lauda (and everyone else involved) has a reasonable expectation of privacy re their genitals. Why do you even care so much unless you want to get some of this action, too?

[SaltySpitoon]

So the IRS potentially kicking in your door is not a significant consequence? Everyone here likes to imagine this forum is just like a video game with no real world consequences. The fact is many people depend on this forum for income and this mob behavior can and does do damage to ones ability to trade here. This place is so rife with fraud building up a reputation is not an easy or quick task. It takes time, money, risk, and effort to build your reputation here just for it to be destroyed in an instant in retaliation for criticizing the wrong people. You poo poo at the idea and say people will just ignore invalid ratings and the like, but who actually takes the time to validate these ratings? Almost no one, and the ones who most need to are the least likely and the most populous. In effect this has serious repercussions on ones ability to solicit trade here among other real world consequences imposed by these control freaks.

I don't think its a reasonable risk, so not worth worrying about. When it comes to forum drama, I agree that there is no real world consequences, just an absolute waste of time. Every single day real businesses get slandered by fake reviews. Restaurants will hire people to leave fake Yelp reviews for competitors. That is the world we live in, yet they manage. I understand that it takes time to build a reputation here, but considering that the circle jerk of people complaining are not involved in business here, and those that are don't seem to have any inconvenience cast upon them, I'm hesitant to feel bad for them. Its a moral crusade for them, they have not been cut off from their income. Even despite years of this same stuff going on, I haven't seen anyone suffer any unreasonable repercussions.

If I could leave negative feedback saying "Tecshare is an evil purple alien, avoid his laser beam at all cost!" and that has any effect on your business whatsoever...I really don't know what to say about that. There is absolutely no reasonable solution in that case.

For the record, I'm not saying I support anyone's behavior, I'm just saying its not worth your mental health to get too involved in it. People are going to think whatever they are going to think, if you must control the narrative, you'll go insane.

[eddie13]

[TECSHARE]

So the IRS potentially kicking in your door is not a significant consequence? Everyone here likes to imagine this forum is just like a video game with no real world consequences. The fact is many people depend on this forum for income and this mob behavior can and does do damage to ones ability to trade here. This place is so rife with fraud building up a reputation is not an easy or quick task. It takes time, money, risk, and effort to build your reputation here just for it to be destroyed in an instant in retaliation for criticizing the wrong people. You poo poo at the idea and say people will just ignore invalid ratings and the like, but who actually takes the time to validate these ratings? Almost no one, and the ones who most need to are the least likely and the most populous. In effect this has serious repercussions on ones ability to solicit trade here among other real world consequences imposed by these control freaks.

I don't think its a reasonable risk, so not worth worrying about. When it comes to forum drama, I agree that there is no real world consequences, just an absolute waste of time. Every single day real businesses get slandered by fake reviews. Restaurants will hire people to leave fake Yelp reviews for competitors. That is the world we live in, yet they manage. I understand that it takes time to build a reputation here, but considering that the circle jerk of people complaining are not involved in business here, and those that are don't seem to have any inconvenience cast upon them, I'm hesitant to feel bad for them. Its a moral crusade for them, they have not been cut off from their income. Even despite years of this same stuff going on, I haven't seen anyone suffer any unreasonable repercussions.

If I could leave negative feedback saying "Tecshare is an evil purple alien, avoid his laser beam at all cost!" and that has any effect on your business whatsoever...I really don't know what to say about that. There is absolutely no reasonable solution in that case.

For the record, I'm not saying I support anyone's behavior, I'm just saying its not worth your mental health to get too involved in it. People are going to think whatever they are going to think, if you must control the narrative, you'll go insane.

I am not sure what you are agreeing to, because I do not agree that none of this abusive behavior here has any real world consequences. Legitimate users often spend YEARS carefully and laboriously building up their reputations, taking risks all along the way in order to do so. Then a band of obsessive compulsive control freaks come along and strip that reputation with no examination, recourse, or accountability for ANY REASON they can dig up or manufacture in an instant. Are you saying your reputation is worthless? Are you saying that everyone who considers trading with people carefully examines the validity of ratings before deciding to trade? Are you saying it is likely that users whom the trust system was designed for most, new users are able to tell the difference between a real negative rating and a manufactured baseless one?

Oh well shit, you manage. I am sure everything is great for you in mod land. I am sure that offers you no additional protection from this sort of harassment right? In that case since it is not a problem for you personally it must not be a problem for anyone right? You are totally avoiding the point and essentially saying the trust system doesn't matter. The point is the lack of accountability. The point is it is totally convenient for PROTECTED people such as yourself to brush this off because you don't have to worry about it in the slightest, and pretending it is a non-issue is a far easier solution for you personally seeing as it has no cost to you. The point is double standards, selective enforcement, and ambiguous ever changing unwritten rules. Essentially what you are saying is this place is a big fucking joke and no one should invest any time money or effort into it because some retards LAARPing Game of Thrones can take it all away at any time. If you think the internet has no capability to have real world repercussions on people, I am sorry but you are either a fucking moron or totally disingenuous.

[mikeywith]

Its a moral crusade for them, they have not been cut off from their income.

You are missing a major point ( signature campains) .

Most managers don't accept members with a negative trust from DT member which i don't find very reasonable but still.

That is one reason why so many people spend a quarter of their lifetime debating DT and trust shit, i am pretty certain if signature campaigns focus on merit / quality post and cancel the trust rule, many people will stop caring - because as you mentioned most people here don't trade, and once they happen to do so - they use escrow anyway!

[Lauda]

With Thule, CH, Quickscammer & co.