Flag - "CryptoSparks"

[suchmoon]

Being a bad trader still doesn't make him a scammer.

He's not a trader, just a lying weasel. But you can't ever be wrong so you wouldn't admit he's a scammer even if he posted "I'm a scammer" here.

[1715642439]

1715642439

[1715642439]

1715642439

[1715642439]

1715642439

[nutildah]

Being a bad trader still doesn't make him a scammer.

He misrepresented his abilities in every way possible, from overinflating the importance of backtest data to claiming to have a bankroll he did not have to altering his graphs to reflect a performance that did not exist.

Yet you're still defending him.

[eddie13]

Their was reasonable doubt at first, then came his incredible claims, then his completely failed performance.. 

Definitely turned out to be a piece of shit and probably lied about a lot of things to even get the chance he got, aside from his blatant misrepresentations such as backtest results and bankroll.. 

[hacker1001101001]

I agree, there are a chain of incidences here and a person who's mouth is vomiting shit would always do shit.

He should have just accepted he is not an good trader, on the top of that asking other for funds to trade even after knowing he can't reach the promised profits is shady AF !

I am supporting this flag after lots of patience !

[TECSHARE]

Being a bad trader still doesn't make him a scammer.

He misrepresented his abilities in every way possible, from overinflating the importance of backtest data to claiming to have a bankroll he did not have to altering his graphs to reflect a performance that did not exist.

Yet you're still defending him.

Objecting to the methodology used to tag him does not equal defending him. If we gave the police unlimited power to search people's homes without a warrant, no doubt they would find plenty of drug dealers and other criminals. The problem with that is it also strips the innocent of all of their rights. That has always been my complaint with this issue, it was based on speculation and guesses, not facts.

[guigui371]

We are more than halfway through my first month, and no profit to show. 

Sounds like at least some bot users were hit with another loss, this time 23.5%, around Christmas. Care to share with us your results now? I honestly hope you're not at -60% like some seem to be.

Sure, let me gather the latest data. 
I'll be back in 5 - 10 minutes

[guigui371]

here it is :

Ok so it has been exactly 1 month.

Find some screenshot and Csv of my bitmex account. 

As per 1st post, I started with 0.15BTC (two deposits, so don't look at the -78%) on the 29th of november. 
Gabriel has been easy to talk and exchange outside of this site (I mainly used telegramme to communicate with him).



firstly, the dashboard of my bitmex (coinmarketman website).




After 29 days of trading my account is 39.10% down




Now this is the visual of the size of my account.
I don't know why it doesnt show 24th to 29th of december :/






And below the trade history (again, it looks like 24th to 29th are missing).
Beware that when the bot is not doing anything, it opens a tiny loss position (like losing 5 cents) to not be dormant.
So the stats are biased against it.
Like Out of the 24 trades identified by coinmarketman there are 3 winning trades and 2 losing trade.  19 trades are just a day without a trade (but counted as a loss). 





Now for the Bitmex informations :

We have the same balance of 0.0093BTC making a 0.0587 loss.






So the bitmex history show no activity since the 24th of december.
Hence the above visuals are also empty. 




I guess what is of interess of you is the order history, and the bot being liquidated.
Find the last order executed on my account :






Finally find the full CSV order of my account. 
It is a csv file, nothing malicious.
https://filebin.net/wmlwm8qwuh8w52vc
The file will be available for 1 week, but I have it on my computer and can reupload if needed.


I will seek more information about why is the bot sleeping since the 24th,
I know for a fact that Gabriel is working on a platform where users can chose between 3 or 4 bots, and also users have refferal links where they get a share of the 30% tax from the profit from their referees.
And also that the 30% tax only applied if the account is in profit.

In my case, he told me that if i move to the new platform, i would get a tax credit and will only start being punctioned for my profit once my balance is back above 0.15BTC


Well, this is my story.
To be continued.

[nutildah]

Objecting to the methodology used to tag him does not equal defending him. If we gave the police unlimited power to search people's homes without a warrant, no doubt they would find plenty of drug dealers and other criminals. The problem with that is it also strips the innocent of all of their rights. That has always been my complaint with this issue, it was based on speculation and guesses, not facts.

You are defending him ipso facto pretending its simply a matter of him being a bad trader. You are wrong here. Your analogies carry no weight, because yet again I have to remind you this isn't a court room. Its not a justice system, and nobody is being tried or even accused of committing any crimes. Nobody has "rights" on this forum. All usage of it is a privilege that could be revoked at any second, for any reason. Not that we have the power to ban users anyway.

Level 1 flags are based on speculation. The text in a Level 1 flag reads:

Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer.

Key word: believe.

The text guideline for leaving a negative trust rating reads:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk

Key word: think.

Usage of either component does not have to be based on "facts." They are both guided by personal opinion. The flag system is being used correctly here, as is the trust rating system.

here it is:

Thanks for sharing the specifics of your experience.

[TECSHARE]

Objecting to the methodology used to tag him does not equal defending him. If we gave the police unlimited power to search people's homes without a warrant, no doubt they would find plenty of drug dealers and other criminals. The problem with that is it also strips the innocent of all of their rights. That has always been my complaint with this issue, it was based on speculation and guesses, not facts.

You are defending him ipso facto pretending its simply a matter of him being a bad trader. You are wrong here. Your analogies carry no weight, because yet again I have to remind you this isn't a court room. Its not a justice system, and nobody is being tried or even accused of committing any crimes. Nobody has "rights" on this forum. All usage of it is a privilege that could be revoked at any second, for any reason. Not that we have the power to ban users anyway.

Level 1 flags are based on speculation. The text in a Level 1 flag reads:

Warning: One or more bitcointalk.org users have reported that they strongly believe that the creator of this topic is a scammer.

Key word: believe.

The text guideline for leaving a negative trust rating reads:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk

Key word: think.

Usage of either component does not have to be based on "facts." They are both guided by personal opinion. The flag system is being used correctly here, as is the trust rating system.

here it is:

Thanks for sharing the specifics of your experience.

You know I love our little chats where you just imagine whatever is useful to you at any given time to be true and just carry on as if it is fact. Funny how its not a court room when people disagree with you, but when you get to role play Stasi officer throwing accusations of guilt around then it sure sounds a lot like one. We have been over all of this already, not that this will stop you from eating your vomit and puking it back up again perpetually.

This isn't a court room, but you are indeed making accusations that have destructive effects on the community in general if not backed by demonstrable observable evidence, instead of just the best attempts of bored control freak losers pretending to be Mrs. Cleo bearing no responsibility for the damages false accusations cause. I know you like to imagine yourself in charge like all control freaks do, but you aren't and you don't get to unilaterally revoke these privileges no matter how much it gives your midget dick a chub thinking about it.

You really love cutting that flag description short to make it fit your Stasi LAARPing don't you?

"Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with CryptoSparks 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."

I don't care how many people you catch in your indiscriminate shotgunning of users. The ends does not justify the means and you bear no responsibility when you wrongly damage the reputations of others, which is why these standards of evidence were created to begin with to put a leash on people like you who simply enjoy lording over others regardless of the cost to the community.

[nutildah]

Regardless of your interpretation, the flag on CryptoSparks is a perfect example of a Level 1 Flag being used perfectly for what it was intended. The flag was placed, some people invested anyway, and got creamed.

"Indiscriminate shotgunning of users"... what bullshit. This isn't true in the slightest. The only reason you're still typing is because you cannot bear being proven wrong, even though you are wrong on this forum on a near daily basis.

What is it you think you are actually doing besides defending a con artist? You're basically just trolling. You don't actually contribute jack to shit and have officially become just another cryptohunter... Lost their mind after receiving a negative trust for being an incessant asshole.

[hacker1001101001]

What is it you think you are actually doing besides defending a con artist? You're basically just trolling. You don't actually contribute jack to shit and have officially become just another cryptohunter... Lost their mind after receiving a negative trust for being an incessant asshole.

That negative trust is not warrant to anyone with his right mind, looks nice of you laughing at users about the abuse they have faced and not even reacting to it only because you have personal grudges.