Lauda creating flags against random people linked to threads not related.

[Timelord2067]

So far I've come across three flags Lauda has created whereby the thread is not the subject of the flag or the UID isn't even mentioned in the thread.

http://loyce.club/trust/flags/35.html

304 Active. Lauda flagged xolxol (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - Lauda appears to have engaged in Trust (Flag) abuse after xolxol posted this in their thread.

294 Active. Lauda flagged proudhon (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - proudhon makes one post which is replied to by another poste of the thread in a civil manor. (If the thread is so bad, how come the OP wasn't flagged??)

288 Active. Lauda flagged Khaos77 (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by Khaos77[/size]. - Khaos77 doesn't even post in the thread and is not mentioned.


I don't have time tonight to review more of Lauda's Flags, but to me it seems he is using the Flag system to punish others.  What's @theymos' position on the creation of Flags?

[Timelord2067]

Reserved #1

Comment:

Flag 712: @bobitza , @ChuckBuck , @Enre , @JollyGood , @RBF , @rhomelmabini , @robelneo , @sabotag3x , @ScamViruS are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5161689.msg53951875#msg53951875

Flag 1260: @AlexSimion , @joksim299 , @nullius , @TheUltraElite , @TMAN , are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5161689.msg53951875#msg53951875

[Timelord2067]

Reserved #2

[unibitcoinist]

Strange, reference threads are not related by any how. Is this abuse of the system?
I think Lauda somehow linked wrong threads or is it probably a bug?

[Lauda]

A glitch in the matrix,
it sure must be,
now ~Lauda and fuck off.

[unibitcoinist]

A glitch in the matrix,
it sure must be,
now ~Lauda and fuck off.

The last one Khaos77 was registered here in January 2019, but the thread you referred was created in 2017 and I don't see any recent post on that thread.

[TMAN]

A glitch in the matrix,
it sure must be,
now ~Lauda and fuck off.

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed. I guess we can have elections for a new leader

[suchmoon]

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed. I guess we can have elections for a new leader

I don't think cults have elections. Maybe we'll get a PM telling us whom to worship.

[TMAN]

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed. I guess we can have elections for a new leader

I don't think cults have elections. Maybe we'll get a PM telling us whom to worship.

Fuck the PM, I am the new leader hostile takeover style

[tmfp]

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed.

Well, I saw it was a TMAN post and read it a bit too quickly...

[TMAN]

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed.

Well, I saw it was a TMAN post and read it a bit too quickly...

Never name a cunt, don’t put the pussy on a pedestal

[bones261]

The last one Khaos77 was registered here in January 2019, but the thread you referred was created in 2017 and I don't see any recent post on that thread.

Khaos77 has very similar views as Kiklo. A member who has been permabanned from the forum. We can't prove it for sure; however, how many fanboys does zeitcoin really have?

[Quickseller]

This is unsurprising. I don’t doubt that forcing consensus for trust ratings (flags) will lead to lauda being discredited.

[Timelord2067]

Continuing to count backwards

286 Active. Lauda flagged Thorecoin (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - Other than Lauda's one line (shit post?) Red Trust and flag of The OP Thorecoin (who has absolutely no other Trust Wall, good, bad, or indifferent). Lauda does not provide a reason why he believes Thorecoin requires a flag.

[Archive]

Horrible and utter scam coin. Tagged and flagged.

285 Active. Lauda flagged Pete550 (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. -  Pete550 has a 79 page thread - Lauda's post #1,570 quotes a source then makes this threat:

[Archive]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/buvv9x/walton_team_just_released_their_mainnet/.
Anyone promoting this scam coin will be tagged as an accomplice.

284 Active. Lauda flagged Dogedarkdev (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - While the thread Lauda cites discusses a potential scam, Dogedarkdev (the subject of the flag) is not mentioned even once in the thread, or the Reddit thread that is cited in the OP.


So far out of six Flags created by Lauda, four gives no reasons or are revenge flags while the remaining two flags the subject of the flag isn't even mentioned.

This is unsurprising. I don’t doubt that forcing consensus for trust ratings (flags) will lead to lauda being discredited.

I've only just spotted this:

35 Insufficient support. <U>(Withdrawn!)</U> Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Quickseller, peloso, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.

Lauda alleged the following, but later withdrew it: Quickseller violated a written contract, resulting in damages

Which as with the previous identified Flags created by Lauda is a thread that wasn't even started by him.

Quickseller vs cleaning up the forum - one of those tedious threads, but clearly @Lauda did not enter a contract with @Quickseller - so I have opposed the flag.  (That makes seven Fake Flags from seven Flags looked at)

A glitch in the matrix,
it sure must be,
now ~Lauda and fuck off.

Likewise, I am sure.  (did it months ago)

Your Tiara is slipping Lauda.

[TECSHARE]

This is unsurprising. I don’t doubt that forcing consensus for trust ratings (flags) will lead to lauda being discredited.

If lauda was just making baseless flags that would be one thing, but they are clearly actively ignoring the pre-requisites for even creating the flag as laid out by the administration. Essentially lauda wants to make their own rules and refuses to operate within the community. It really depends on how you define discredited, but I would say that qualifies.

[Timelord2067]

This is unsurprising. I don’t doubt that forcing consensus for trust ratings (flags) will lead to lauda being discredited.

If lauda was just making baseless flags that would be one thing, but they are clearly actively ignoring the pre-requisites for even creating the flag as laid out by the administration. Essentially lauda wants to make their own rules and refuses to operate within the community. It really depends on how you define discredited, but I would say that qualifies.

Thanks for your support - just a reminder that although this isn't a moderated thread I ask that now most of you have had your laugh that you please keep the posts civil.


Example eight, we go back to Flag 103:

103 Active. Lauda flagged sgbett (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Hhampuz, micgoossens, sgbett, GeoRW. Opposed by jbreher, MirkoIta[/size].

sgbett starts a thread Craig Wright recognised by US Govt as Satoshi, author of white paper and has been slapped with a Flag by Lauda for his troubles.

This is the OP:

https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-creator-craig-s-wright-satoshi-nakamoto-granted-us-copyright-registrations-for-bitcoin-white-paper-and-code/

implications for Bitcoin?

Just for clarity, there are no flag creations by Lauda between Flag 103 and 284, so the running tally is (six no reason/revenge and two user not mentioned) fake flags out of eight studied flags.

[xolxol]

Clearly an abuse,desperate moves from abuser you're power wont comeback,hopefully your colleagues should be removed too.

[LoyceV]

I've only just spotted this:

35 Insufficient support. <U>(Withdrawn!)</U> Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Quickseller, peloso, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.

The aftermath of that flag was discussed here.

I now see the "<U>(Withdrawn!)</U>" bug, it's fixed in the latest version:

2019-07-05 Fri 10.24h
source: loyce.club

35 Insufficient support. (Withdrawn!) Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Timelord2067, Quickseller, peloso, korner, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.

[xolxol]

I've only just spotted this:

35 Insufficient support. <U>(Withdrawn!)</U> Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Quickseller, peloso, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.

The aftermath of that flag was discussed here.

I now see the "<U>(Withdrawn!)</U>" bug, it's fixed in the latest version:

2019-07-05 Fri 10.24h
source: loyce.club

35 Insufficient support. (Withdrawn!) Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Timelord2067, Quickseller, peloso, korner, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.

thats the old flag,these 3 flags are new and its clearly an abuse of the new system.

[Timelord2067]

so the running tally is (six no reason/revenge and two user not mentioned) fake flags out of eight studied flags.

[quote author=xolxol link=topic=5161689.msg51715521#msg51715521 date=1562318695]
thats the old flag,these 3 flags are new and its clearly an abuse of the new system.
[/quote]

Moving right along...

http://loyce.club/trust/flags/39.html

40 Insufficient support. Lauda flagged Bitcoin SV (type 3, see why). Supported by Foxpup, Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, [size=1]mosprognoz, Iamtutut, GeoRW, korner[/size]. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, chimk, [size=1]jbreher, Quickseller, peloso, MirkoIta, hv_, HardFireMiner, sirsplashalot, williamuk, actisstupidname, Bitcoin SV, breign[/size]. - In a thread started by nutildah although the it's obvious that the thread concerns the coin called Bitcoin SV, the actual user Bitcoin SV isn't mentioned. (might be splitting hairs I know, but the thread can be locked at any time thus null and voiding the Flag).  The majority oppose the Flag including theymos.

47 Insufficient support. Lauda flagged bill gator (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, TheUltraElite, [size=1]Timelord2067[/size]. Opposed by OgNasty, malevolent, redsn0w, The Pharmacist, eddie13, Steamtyme, [size=1]TECSHARE, Quickseller, Rmcdermott927, bill gator, teeGUMES, Thule, otrkid1970, actisstupidname, BharatDEX[/size].  - Lauda has voided his own flag by locking the thread but not withdrawing his support.




[glow=orange,2,300]49 Active.[/glow][/b] [glow=#FFFFE0,2,300]Lauda flagged deeperx (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Avirunes, TheUltraElite, Hhampuz, micgoossens, [size=1]mosprognoz, N0sferatu[/size]. Opposed by dragonvslinux[/size]. [/glow] - @Lutpin (not @Lauda) gives merit to the thread this Flag and the following flag cite.  The thread goes for 117 pages, so there is clearly substance to it with crypto-rainbow (following Flag) being cited in the OP, however, in one of those TL;DR moments, I can't find the accused @deeperx mentioned in the first page of the thread.

[glow=orange,2,300]50 Active.[/glow][/b] [glow=#FFFFE0,2,300]Lauda flagged crypto-rainbow (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Avirunes, TheUltraElite, Hhampuz, micgoossens, DireWolfM14, [size=1]mosprognoz, N0sferatu[/size]. Opposed by dragonvslinux[/size]. [/glow] - the accused is the subject of the thread which has run for 117 pages.  Lauda didn't start the thread, so there is always the risk the flag will be voided if the thread were locked.

[glow=orange,2,300]51 Active.[/glow][/b] [glow=#FFFFE0,2,300]Lauda flagged PHI1618 (type 1, see why). Supported by [size=1]Lauda, mindrust, Vispilio, micgoossens[/size]. Opposed by mhanbostanci, [size=1]TECSHARE, Quickseller, 2run, Matthias9515, PHI1618, Dogan86, zfrey, huseyin15, gospodin, vipganyan[/size]. [/glow] - In this flag Lauda accuses two users, PHI1618 and BCT Staff member EFS, but only creates a flag on the soft target PHI1618.

Although Lauda creates the flag, he does not respond to any of the multiple questions put to him (including the accused PHI1618 responding to justify what he had done) concerning the accusation in the thread that was started on the 12th of June 2019.

[glow=red,2,300]52 Active.[/glow][/b] [glow=#FF9696,2,300]Lauda flagged MemoryDealers (type 3, see why). Supported by Foxpup, Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, infofront, yogg, mindrust, Hhampuz, HairyMaclairy, micgoossens, [size=1]Hueristic, mosprognoz, GeoRW[/size]. Opposed by theymos, Stunna, malevolent, [size=1]jbreher, Quickseller, MirkoIta, iwantapony, actisstupidname[/size]. [/glow] - Lauda seems to falsely claim that he engaged in a contract with the accused (and is not the starter of the thread) - @theymos amongst others oppose the red flag.  The OP @TheNewAnon135246 has not created *any* flag against the accused who had not been online for nearly three months prior to the thread being started.

This seems to be the only one so far that has substance:

[glow=orange,2,300]64 Active.[/glow][/b] [glow=#FFFFE0,2,300]Lauda flagged The-One-Above-All (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, owlcatz, babo, LFC_Bitcoin, yogg, o_solo_miner, TMAN, Lafu, micgoossens, bitmover, ChiBitCTy, DireWolfM14, 1miau, [size=1]Timelord2067, IconFirm, mosprognoz, blurryeyed, cabalism13[/size]. Opposed by Quickseller, xolxol, The-One-Above-All, actisstupidname[/size]. [/glow] - even @theymos supports the Flag.



Our running totals for the 13 Flags that Lauda has created:

Two Red flags which offer no proof - one of which he withdrew support.

Seven no reason/revenge , three users not mentioned in the fake flags out of thirteen studied flags.  Two actual accusations and one Lauda does not respond to questions with the majority of the flag's voters voting against.


Eleven out of thirteen Flags ~ 85% of Lauda's Flags are inaccurate when you look right into it.