Theymos SHAME ON YOU

[suchmoon]

I have never claimed you are ugly.

I have never claimed you have.

[1714658886]

1714658886

[1714658886]

1714658886

[bonesjonesreturns]

It must raise a few eye brow that theymos removed his exclusion from a proven scammer. The same scammer that was involved with a serious extortion ploy. A dangerous and highly irregular escrow.
The same scammer that will use red tag to silence and deter members from posting irrefutable evidence of his prior scamming and the evidence that strongly suggest he is dangerous.
The same scammer theymos ask 100 members to exclude from trust system.

Yes, this not expected and looks to be a troubling development.
I notice an evidence was recently provided that destruct all previous defence of his scamming excuses. ( scammer not theymos).

Theymos should take a care not to be seen supporting or accommodating scammers, or those who serious extort other members, risk a large investors funds with irregular dangerous escrow and most above everything those that will pervert or invert the intended purposes of the trust system by :

● Red tags applied to members who produce example of historical scamming or direct financial motivated wrong doing of DT members. Those DT members are not to use the trust system to silence whistle blowing on them.

● Using or trading red tags mutual removing with the intention of having valid scamming tags removed from their own account. Deterrent or immunity to valid red warning even if scamming.

● Not just silencing or punishing whistle blowers but deterring even political adversaries speaking their views, and the impact on free speech is unavoidable and unhealthy.

If a very influential critic of bitcoin or critic this great forum could present a credible strong case that any admin are supporting or even accommodating such members the impact would be highly negative and considerable.

Where free speech and non bias is essential to credibility you must take a care. Scamming is never to be supported or accommodated. To allow scammers to limit free speech is extreme and reckless.

It is unwelcome to believe theymos will support these things,  but must take a great care to not be viewed as accommodating. Perhaps a desire to give another another opportunity to redemption where scammers or trust abuser is concerned must be measured against damaging to the forum honest members who don't scam and trust abuse. Also the reputation of bitcoin and this forum.

Theymos unwilling to give a deep and public view on scammers using red tag to damage whistleblowers  and free speech.

The forum still a credit to theymos many years of sensible centralized  governance perhaps to eager to pass it on to any power hungry that will glad to take over. More care needed.

The shame perhaps should be distributed to all DT that are and were too scared to give theymos design a fair chance and stood back watching scammers and extortion trust abuse the system and whistleblowers.

I wonder why the thread is already be derailed by Suchmoon talk about his ugliness?
I will report and watch if his off topic detailing can be removed.

[Harlot]

Maybe if you put a little background on why you are bitching now would help clarify some things for people out of the loop like me. Because just by reading your OP and the 12 negative feedbacks you have it really sound like you are the one who are having the problem here. Now if you are complaining why theymos didn't step up and save your ass because of your negative feedback sadly theymos and the other admins don't moderate such feedbacks from other members so you are really barking at the wrong tree here. Maybe if you try to resolve your case with the DT members who have tag you with will be a better idea for you.

[cabalism13]

I will stop supporting that forum and will tell everyone from my friends to stop supporting that forum.

You'll stop from supporting this forum but still gonna use it? You really seems to love the Dramas don't you?
You really aren't going to leave, that's  what I see. You really can't.
Cute.

[actmyname]

Bear in mind you only cared about the negative once it had a visible impact. I doubt your objectivity.

Back when I wrote the feedback I wasn't part of DT. Then in 2018 I was added to Blazed's list and all hell broke loose it seems. You have claimed many things, of which you have followed up on very few thereof.

Remember the whole lawsuit debacle?
Remember the whole "quitting the forum" (and immediate return)?

The fact that there are now DT wars and manipulation on various fronts of the system should strike "centralized decentralization" into your heart. Perhaps we should return to the "decentralized centralization" of having DT comprised of theymos's picks... but wait, doesn't that mean he's going to only add scammers to DefaultTrust since theymos hates you so much?

Maybe the only system that works is one where Thule is at the head thereof. I'm sure you wouldn't have any complaints about that.

[Vod]

You know what Vod i got now a company in Helifax.

Never heard of it. 

[bonesjonesreturns]

Bear in mind you only cared about the negative once it had a visible impact. I doubt your objectivity.

Back when I wrote the feedback I wasn't part of DT. Then in 2018 I was added to Blazed's list and all hell broke loose it seems. You have claimed many things, of which you have followed up on very few thereof.

Remember the whole lawsuit debacle?
Remember the whole "quitting the forum" (and immediate return)?

The fact that there are now DT wars and manipulation on various fronts of the system should strike "centralized decentralization" into your heart. Perhaps we should return to the "decentralized centralization" of having DT comprised of theymos's picks... but wait, doesn't that mean he's going to only add scammers to DefaultTrust since theymos hates you so much?

Maybe the only system that works is one where Thule is at the head thereof. I'm sure you wouldn't have any complaints about that.

Thule makes some important observations and makes some strong points. He is a valuable member as is a time that does not blindly follow or remain silent.

You don't appear to be a trust abuser. A more sensible and credible DT selection. Although there are unexplained inconsistencies that could be interpret as double standards. There are some inclusions on you trust list of proved scammers and abusers. These could be due to lack of study.

I find your appraisal of those opinions voiced by thule to be disingenuous and mocking.

There is undeniable merit and a robustness to his assertions. He may be goes too far with theymos " support" or "endorse" the scamming and abuse. There is certainly an accommodation and tolerance for proved scammers and proved trust abusers that exceeds optimal limits.

Theymos has also sadly demonstrated a contempt for the truth whistle blowers being to the forum. One may hope this is due to him being annoyed those truths expose that glaring weakness in the designs he has been experimenting with. Those designs are as suboptimal for focused and credible scam warnings as the are protecting free speech.

It is safe to say that there are several obvious design tweak that Theymos could introduce that would improve things drastically in terms of reducing the luxurious range of abuse and capability for proven scammer to hold such influence in default trust. Theymos refusing to action or even discuss these tweaks, and prefers to apply tweaks for maximum negative impact of the abuse and bestow more incentive to abuse. Along with working with proven scammers to have their own red rags expunged leave him open to legitimate and criticism.

I don't think that taking his words and expanding them out into the ridiculous is sensible. His speculation ""may"" be lightly exaggerated in specific areas, but you attempt to reduce their value to near zero is unbecoming of one with such a general high standard of reason and objectivity.

I am willing to expanding on any point you wish further clarity or debate.

All members even those with anger and upset should have their points objectively considered, analysed and debated. Not from a gang of ridiculing bullies who smell entertainment and blood from the safety of the pack.

Out from nowhere there could come one to his aid that upset the easy advantage assumed.
That was once you actmyname. I hope it could be again.

[JollyGood]

@suchmoon

Why is this user claiming to have your personal details?

And since a threat has been made against you, why is he not banned?

Have you bitch asked your friends to delete your adress from the scam thread?


I still have it my bitch and will share it with everyone who ever got abused or scammed by you

[YOSHIE]

I will stop supporting that forum and will tell everyone from my friends to stop supporting that forum.

What about the attacks outside the BitCointalk Forum, who is responsible.

I have heard the history of people complaining about the Bitcointalk Forum and exposing negative things to people outside, in the end the person who brought the negative news would self-destruct.

Popular meaning in the adage "missing one, growing a thousand" that's what happened on the BitCointalk forum.

The point is: I think of arguments, opinions, disputes, mutual disbelief, mutual accusations, things that are common everywhere, let alone in a forum outside too.
If you know well the meaning of the internet anything can happen, while humans have lust and greed.
OP topic; slightly leads here.

In discussions about the Cloudflare disaster, I've seen people saying that protecting against denial of service attacks without Cloudflare is basically impossible. While it is much more difficult, it's not impossible.

Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1803913.0

[Lauda]

OP, are you still this butthurt? 

[bonesjonesreturns]

@suchmoon

Why is this user claiming to have your personal details?

And since a threat has been made against you, why is he not banned?

Have you bitch asked your friends to delete your adress from the scam thread?


I still have it my bitch and will share it with everyone who ever got abused or scammed by you

You appear to be threatening thule?
Do you not threaten punishment to those you claim are scammers?

Please evaluate thules points rather than opening up separate discussion.
You would establish validity of scam accusation before comment on personal details being known or revealed.
It is permissible to shame scammers.

Suchmoon I'm sure is more then capable of pushing for a ban for the absolute minimum requirement.
Why are you not banned for much more dangerous behaviors?
Is it less dangerous to ignore scam facilitating at the highest level?

You are very much a cog (albeit a small and crusty one) that contributes to the abusive and corrupt system thule is correctly standing against. Salute your seniors and superiors. Stop whining for thules ban. Tackle and eviscerate his argument or remain a pathetic double standards fake scam hunter forever more.

His "threat" to reveal personal info to only those scammed is permissible, so move along, there are other DT impatiently waiting for your eager mouth.


Is this the proven scammer Lauda I see here?
The scamming, extorting, high risk escrow trust abuser that forms a solid basis for thules credible statements??


Make enquiry if an honest member is upset because his account is abused by proven scammers like lauda?

Lauda probably as if all his scammed and extorted victims are butt hurt.

[suchmoon]

@suchmoon

Why is this user claiming to have your personal details?

He doesn't. Douchebags like Quickseller have been peddling fake dox for years and Thule isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

And since a threat has been made against you, why is he not banned?

Technically it's not a threat against me but against whoever lives in the "small poor house". Luckily he's the yapping poodle type so the risk of him actually doing anything is zero.

[JollyGood]

OP, are you still this butthurt?  

It seems the thread was started purely because the OP is frustrated, angry and upset.

@suchmoon

Why is this user claiming to have your personal details?

He doesn't. Douchebags like Quickseller have been peddling fake dox for years and Thule isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

And since a threat has been made against you, why is he not banned?

Technically it's not a threat against me but against whoever lives in the "small poor house". Luckily he's the yapping poodle type so the risk of him actually doing anything is zero.

Ah I see, that just about sums up it up. Sorry I have not been aware of various things going on in the forum in the past so it can be tricky to work out what is going on and who has multi-alt accounts.