realr0ach is a danger to newbies and guests.

[Last of the V8s]

This flag is for realr0ach

This is because he is dishonest, again and again:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5117829.msg50064749#msg50064749
https://archive.is/l0dAs#selection-1415.320-1415.388
https://archive.is/l0dAs#selection-1775.202-1775.245
https://archive.is/l0dAs#selection-1947.455-1947.569
see how in these 3 he steers people away from reasonable and knowledgeable views on bitcoin trading?
how he lies about a respected and trusted trader?

I suggest we warn newbies and guests that they should not consider trading with him.

1. Dishonesty. He simply cannot be trusted
2. Previous account got hacked. iirc he did trade with that account. his views on whether to trade bitcoin have changed considerably
3. No idea what might be going on in his pm's - it is quite reasonable to presume he continues his zero-knowledge attacks on bitcoin in personal messages with newcomers. Nor any idea if he is still advocating altcoins -

WTS 400k for .03btc or an LTC

You are correct.  Random noobs on this forum INCORRECTLY stated that the only valid game theory path was to dump BCH (think it was derived from some nonsense Szabo fabricated).  He made the error of assuming you're required to keep one token at all.  The real optimal path is to dump both of them in event of rough consensus attack.  If you refuse to dump both for whatever reason, then the optimal path to try and minimize loss would just be to hold all of them.

I like and own several other cryptocoins, and still I consider BCH a joke of a shitcoin.

Yea well, I consider bitcoin a useless shitcoin compared to physical silver coins, but holding bitcoin has been more profitable recently.

I replied to the anonymint thread and this is why I'm anti-craptocurrency now, because they are debt based, rent seeking usury systems and my goal is to defeat that paradigm, not create a new obfuscated form of it.  Physical gold and silver commodity currency does this.  Cryptocurrency is nothing but an extension of the same system as now:

1)  Most of your argument revolves around the idea that humans are going into a "knowledge age" and cornering of capital and commodities is useless, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Being a slum lord in the future will always be just as profitable as in the past in a closed ecosystem (earth) of limited resources if you're able to defend said resources.

2)  The drop in commodity prices over time is not evidence heralding a "knowledge age", it's because humans discovered MASSIVELY cheap energy like when oil was cheaper than water in texas, and ever since this has been a game of nothing but arbing excess energy for materials, and now that energy is experiencing collapsing EROI so the arb game is up.

3)  Cryptocurrencies not only have no Schelling point, they have a reverse Schelling point because network effect assumes infinite scalability. As soon as the fees go up, people will be moving into the next coin to avoid usury, and all these networks are highly scaling constrained by design. Death by dilution is inevitable without scaling.

4)  Cryptocurrency doesn't function as a store of value because it's price floor is recursive based on it's own demand (in PoW). This means it's a complete house of cards in terms of so called value storage.
In commodities like silver, the ESF practices Keynesianism in the commodity markets and naked shorts them down to cost of production to try and keep their market caps as low as possible and prevent them from competing with the dollar. Why? Because nobody would submit to slavery via debt based scam currency at all unless you force them into it.

They can't short metals lower than cost of production because it would create scarcity and be counterintuitive to their goals. However, they can short bitcoin below cost of production because there is no real price floor, only a temporary, synthetic one. This in turn causes the miners to be forced to turn off (like KNC) and the synthetic floor crashes even more until the thing implodes to nothingness.

Another reason why craptocurrency is horrible and not a sound form of money. Metals like silver can be manipulated by shorts to contain their market cap, but bitcoin can actually be destroyed by them due to having no real floor.

5)  All cryptocurrencies are inherently rent seeking usury systems and a pseudo form of debt based currency if you will. The PoW chain does not just magically stay up on it's own, it requires a constant upkeep (rent). A peer to peer gold or silver transaction can be done with no overhead cost, but a cryptocurrency transaction always travels through the hands of the rent seekers and will cost > 0.

6)  The further you abstract money away from barter, the larger a scam it is

Yet he is still here. It is highly suspicious.

+snip+
You've already reached the peak of risk in your high risk investment.  Anyone can click the 2 year chart and see that.  It's an obvious unsustainable bubble and anyone cashing out here will not be missing much.  I imagine it will do something like a 50% retrace off it's base, which would take it to something like $2100, but the pumpers may or may not try to take it a few hundred higher first.  This is literally a textbook pump and dump and it's easy to see from the non-aggregate market movements.  Bitcoin has probably never once behaved as an aggregate market.  Every single move is just some entity like Digital Currency Group trying to manipulate it in a certain direction to profit.

My understanding of the new newbie-flag voting is: you should only vote to flag him if you believe he is highly likely to scam someone, and not because you don't like him or disagree with him.

[1714150417]

1714150417

[1714150417]

1714150417

[The Sceptical Chymist]

gynophobic bigot

Is that like a misogynist?  I've never heard the above term before, but then again I'd probably fall into the 'stupid' category you also mentioned.

Nor because he's a metalhead. Metals are okay.

Again, what is a 'metalhead'?  Are you talking about precious metals or the spun-out heavy metal stereotype that should have gone away in the 1990s?  

I've only read a handful of Roach's posts, and I agree he has strong opinions (don't remember what they are, because I don't visit the sections he posts in anymore) and this might be off-putting to newbies, but people say the same thing about me.  The fact is that most newbies here are only interested in bounties and earning money from the forum and don't want to contribute anything constructive.  If you're here to learn, lurking is your friend.  

It's a tough forum, and I learned that from my days as a lurker.  When it came time to register my account, I took zero shit and was prepared to defend myself.  That's kind of how I like it--and I don't think someone deserves a flag for being hostile, unwelcoming, or whatever.  Nor do I think this dude is a 'danger' to newbies & guests.  

The dishonesty stuff I'd need to see evidence of.  I don't know about the hacking, but I'm not of the opinion that someone can't be trusted just because their account got hacked--and I know some people believe the opposite.  I'm not going to oppose a flag here; I'm just being a skeptic, and respectfully, too.  OP's got my respect.

[Last of the V8s]

gynophobic bigot

Is that like a misogynist?  I've never heard the above term before, but then again I'd probably fall into the 'stupid' category you also mentioned.

Nor because he's a metalhead. Metals are okay.

Again, what is a 'metalhead'?  Are you talking about precious metals or the spun-out heavy metal stereotype that should have gone away in the 1990s?  

I've only read a handful of Roach's posts, and I agree he has strong opinions (don't remember what they are, because I don't visit the sections he posts in anymore) and this might be off-putting to newbies, but people say the same thing about me.  The fact is that most newbies here are only interested in bounties and earning money from the forum and don't want to contribute anything constructive.  If you're here to learn, lurking is your friend.  

It's a tough forum, and I learned that from my days as a lurker.  When it came time to register my account, I took zero shit and was prepared to defend myself.  That's kind of how I like it--and I don't think someone deserves a flag for being hostile, unwelcoming, or whatever.  Nor do I think this dude is a 'danger' to newbies & guests.  

The dishonesty stuff I'd need to see evidence of.  I don't know about the hacking, but I'm not of the opinion that someone can't be trusted just because their account got hacked--and I know some people believe the opposite.  I'm not going to oppose a flag here; I'm just being a skeptic, and respectfully, too.  OP's got my respect.

Thanks so much.
Yes, similar, someone who fears the womenfolk.
Both precious and heavy.
I largely agree with your advice to newbies.

The dishonesty stuff is the only thing that really matters to flagging him or not. More links to that are indeed the first order of business.

[El duderino_]

No newbie or forum lurking guy will learn anything of reading from r0ach as his opinions are always flawed, always dumb and stupid, and this go's from BTC vs PM's, as from human and jews, as from men against woman, as from whatever, I might almost believe reading from r0ach would get people into hate and terrorism ( writings of this fool doesn't contribute a sh*t to this forum) If your thinking goes even slightly not in line with his then you get a nazi speech or whatever.... Speaking racism things even isn't appropriate in an open community where members as non members continuously are reading and trying to learn stuff...

I don't mind he doesn't like BTC, thats just his loss, I don't mind his non liking woman and hating Homo's (don't know what he likes maybe animals...), but his somewhat extreme approach on those matters are just not right...

For me personal I can have a laugh with him but i'm afraid some people will take him serious, and you never know where someone end up by reading his BS!

In the fools head we are already at WW3 and sh*t.

[TECSHARE]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

[Last of the V8s]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

Thanks for reading my post so carefully. I quite agree that it's there not for their ideas, but to stop them ripping off newbies. Your last sentence doesn't quite parse, because as you have read, I'm not tooling around. Perhaps you mean it as a general invitation to others.

[El duderino_]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

How I think on this...

People should be careful with reading from the r0ach cause of few simple reasons I pointed above and to make it more easy imo, r0ach have proven to be a somewhat smarter person you can see that in his writing.

-Then we have PM's every single BTC'er can say there is serious value/merit in gold and other metals as for numerous things, they have pro's and con's ... but still there is value and use for PM's
-Then we have BTC, every again smarter perso,n involved in the space can say there is value/merit in BTC and it waaaaay more then a useless valueless token, as same way we can all say its a decentralized asset, right?

So I can say both are good and for both is value and use and they could always both be needed!

Then we have r0ach always breaking it down as a total valueless thing completely centralized by the government, not scarce etc many times being addressed and proven wrong about what he says, still he continue he's lies etc 

He would be OK, if he just says to like PM's more as why he thinks and so on but not breaking of BTC continuously based on BS! As I said if he would be a total dumb f*ck I wouldn't mind at all, but as a smarter person its obvious he's here on a mission and that could be flagged so newbies are aware of what other members think of person in question.

(I don't hate him, as I think he's funny from time to time, but to read and be aware! Don't be misguided!)

[TECSHARE]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

Thanks for reading my post so carefully. I quite agree that it's there not for their ideas, but to stop them ripping off newbies. Your last sentence doesn't quite parse, because as you have read, I'm not tooling around. Perhaps you mean it as a general invitation to others.

If it is not for their ideas, why is this entire post filled with nothing but their ideas? I don't see any evidence of them trying to rip anyone off. To me, it looks like you are in fact using the trust system as a tool to punish this user for his ideas that you do not agree with.

[bitmover]

I think newbies do not visit WO thread, as it is very hard to navigate there for them.
Even if r0ach was a threat to newbies, I doubt any would ever read what he writes. WO is a hard to find thread (almost a forum inside the forum, with it own rules [or lack of them]) and even harder to navigate into it. Just the elite of bitcointalk goes there.

A negative trust for him for trolling maybe be appropriate, but he is like a mascot of WO.
Sometimes I have fun reading his trolling stuff

[Quickseller]

It sounds like you don’t like the guy.

I haven’t seen any evidence this guy is possibly dangerous to trade with or even that he even trades.

[Last of the V8s]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

Thanks for reading my post so carefully. I quite agree that it's there not for their ideas, but to stop them ripping off newbies. Your last sentence doesn't quite parse, because as you have read, I'm not tooling around. Perhaps you mean it as a general invitation to others.

If it is not for their ideas, why is this entire post filled with nothing but their ideas? I don't see any evidence of them trying to rip anyone off. To me, it looks like you are in fact using the trust system as a tool to punish this user for his ideas that you do not agree with.

It isn't. Separate the wheat from the chaff. There's plenty. I'll write what I like, but the vote part is abundantly clear.
That evidence isn't required for this type of flag. We're in the realm of the subjective.
I note your theory. Thanks for contributing your views.
Please vote as you wish, or not at all.

It sounds like you don’t like the guy.

I haven’t seen any evidence this guy is possibly dangerous to trade with or even that he even trades.

Would it be some sin if I didn't like him?

I don't like TECSHARE, but I'm not opening up a newbie warning scam flag. He doesn't seem to lie all the time, causing people to doubt him in a potential trade.

Newbies do join because of his posts, btw, and who knows what goes on in their personal messages?

You can also find him on games platforms, so you don't need even to be logged in to be faced with his dishonesty.

[Quickseller]

Maybe I was unclear. It sounds like you are opening the flag because you don’t like him, and not because you actually believe he is dangerous to deal with.

Further, I don’t see evidence he actually trades with anyone, which implies this is a smear attack against him.

[Last of the V8s]

Maybe I was unclear. It sounds like you are opening the flag because you don’t like him, and not because you actually believe he is dangerous to deal with.

Further, I don’t see evidence he actually trades with anyone, which implies this is a smear attack against him.

Thanks for you opinions. Let's hope this stops him from trading with anyone.

[TECSHARE]

I am glad you took our little discussion to heart. The trust system is not there as a mechanism to punish people for bad or wrong ideas, it is there to help protect people from fraud. Stop using it as a tool to punish people who piss you off.

Thanks for reading my post so carefully. I quite agree that it's there not for their ideas, but to stop them ripping off newbies. Your last sentence doesn't quite parse, because as you have read, I'm not tooling around. Perhaps you mean it as a general invitation to others.

If it is not for their ideas, why is this entire post filled with nothing but their ideas? I don't see any evidence of them trying to rip anyone off. To me, it looks like you are in fact using the trust system as a tool to punish this user for his ideas that you do not agree with.

It isn't. Separate the wheat from the chaff. There's plenty. I'll write what I like, but the vote part is abundantly clear.
That evidence isn't required for this type of flag. We're in the realm of the subjective.
I note your theory. Thanks for contributing your views.
Please vote as you wish, or not at all.

It sounds like you don’t like the guy.

I haven’t seen any evidence this guy is possibly dangerous to trade with or even that he even trades.

Would it be some sin if I didn't like him?

I don't like TECSHARE, but I'm not opening up a newbie warning scam flag. He doesn't seem to lie all the time, causing people to doubt him in a potential trade.

Newbies do join because of his posts, btw, and who knows what goes on in their personal messages?

You can also find him on games platforms, so you don't need even to be logged in to be faced with his dishonesty.

"Last of the V8s alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with realr0ach is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

You call it lies, this could simply be a difference of opinion. Furthermore nothing you are stating is at all trade related. This flag is 100% based off of his opinions, which is explicitly prohibited. It is not your job to judge who people should and should't trade with. You have a tool intended to warn users of potential fraud, you are using this tool to punish this user for words you don't like. That is not only counterproductive to the intended use case of the trust system, it is quite childish.

[Last of the V8s]

"Last of the V8s alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with realr0ach is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

You call it lies, this could simply be a difference of opinion. Furthermore nothing you are stating is at all trade related. This flag is 100% based off of his opinions, which is explicitly prohibited. It is not your job to judge who people should and should't trade with. You have a tool intended to warn users of potential fraud, you are using this tool to punish this user for words you don't like. That is not only counterproductive to the intended use case of the trust system, it is quite childish.

You seem to be cottoning on, if slowly. It's a subjective flag. Complain to theymos. If he tweaks the rules, I'll comply.

Can you explain how supporters (or opponents) of these two flags are or are not misusing the system:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=60
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=56

It almost sounds to me like flags should have either 100% support or 100% opposition. If there is a split then one side is wrong and that side is misusing the system... what am I missing?

Type-1 flags are more subjective. If you believe:
 - Anyone dealing with the user is at a high risk of losing money, due to red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and not just due to the user's opinions.
 - Enough of the above-mentioned factors are listed in the linked topic.
 
Then you can support it. If you believe the first but not the second, then you should oppose it and create a separate flag. If you believe that the first is incorrect (ie. people dealing with the user are not at a particularly high risk of losing money), then you should oppose it.

The type-1 flags on Quickseller, BSV, etc. aren't misuse of the system by either supporters or opponents.

There are clear lies in the op.
How can you trade with a liar? One who knows a bit about Bitcoin but insists it has no value and everyone should buy silver?
Where do I claim it's my 'job'? Don't put words in my mouth. It's the forum's job to vote on this advisory flag, though.
For the umpteenth time, it's not about his bigotry and what all else.
Take your 'childish' ad hom elsewhere. You are not coming off as 'knowledgeable or reasonable'.

[TECSHARE]

"Last of the V8s alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with realr0ach is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

You call it lies, this could simply be a difference of opinion. Furthermore nothing you are stating is at all trade related. This flag is 100% based off of his opinions, which is explicitly prohibited. It is not your job to judge who people should and should't trade with. You have a tool intended to warn users of potential fraud, you are using this tool to punish this user for words you don't like. That is not only counterproductive to the intended use case of the trust system, it is quite childish.

You seem to be cottoning on, if slowly. It's a subjective flag. Complain to theymos. If he tweaks the rules, I'll comply.

Can you explain how supporters (or opponents) of these two flags are or are not misusing the system:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=60
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=56

It almost sounds to me like flags should have either 100% support or 100% opposition. If there is a split then one side is wrong and that side is misusing the system... what am I missing?

Type-1 flags are more subjective. If you believe:
 - Anyone dealing with the user is at a high risk of losing money, due to red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and not just due to the user's opinions.
 - Enough of the above-mentioned factors are listed in the linked topic.
 
Then you can support it. If you believe the first but not the second, then you should oppose it and create a separate flag. If you believe that the first is incorrect (ie. people dealing with the user are not at a particularly high risk of losing money), then you should oppose it.

The type-1 flags on Quickseller, BSV, etc. aren't misuse of the system by either supporters or opponents.

There are clear lies in the op.
How can you trade with a liar? One who knows a bit about Bitcoin but insists it has no value and everyone should buy silver?
Where do I claim it's my 'job'? Don't put words in my mouth. It's the forum's job to vote on this advisory flag, though.
For the umpteenth time, it's not about his bigotry and what all else.
Take your 'childish' ad hom elsewhere. You are not coming off as 'knowledgeable or reasonable'.

"Last of the V8s alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with realr0ach is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions."

You conveniently left out the bold part. More subjective does not equal totally subjective. I didn't use any ad hominem attacks, I am characterizing your behavior and backing it up with logical arguments and evidence.

Separate the wheat from the chaff.

That sure sounds a lot like you think it is you who gets to decide who is wheat and who is chaff. I didn't put any words in your mouth. I am already convinced removing your exclusion was a mistake. I see you presenting ZERO EVIDENCE of shady trade related activity, your conclusions are based 100% on his opinions. This is absolutely an abuse of the flag system.

[Last of the V8s]

Separate the wheat from the chaff.

That sure sounds a lot like you think it is you who gets to decide who is wheat and who is chaff.

'Separate the stuff in the op about the guy's opinions from his lies there.' It wasn't clear, true, so you fitted it into your agenda.

The rest of your comments we've been through more than once.

Do you think it is advisable for newbies to trade with the guy?

Tidied up the op a bit, some people couldn't see the wood for the trees
Couple links added, ty for sending them in. Some people are scared to comment.

[tmfp]

Do you think it is advisable for newbies to trade with the guy?

Most people involved in the Physical Silver/Nazi Memorabilia market (ticker:SS/AG) can look after themselves.

[Last of the V8s]

Do you think it is advisable for newbies to trade with the guy?

Most people involved in the Physical Silver/Nazi Memorabilia market (ticker:SS/AG) can look after themselves.

TIL. This guy, though, is not so good at looking after himself, claiming to have gotten his account hacked, and to have sold his bitcoin at the bottom before deciding it was 'bad' and launching into a career of deceit. But anything could be true here.

[Theb]

So far only TECSHARE is only opposing the red flag you have made for realr0ach and I can say that I am leaning on his side as well. The posts you have provided only voice out his opinion towards BTC. He doesn't suggest any other cryptocurrency or shill any kind of investment program towards members, there isn't even the slightest of hint that he is promoting anything else. For me his just another nocoiner messing up the forum with his opinions and false accusation to others. But if you do provide a convincing evidence that he is scamming people then I'll be on your side.