Wrongful accusation by Timelord. Did Yahoo put him in DT?

[minime0105]

I recently came back to this forum after getting message from Yobit when they restart their campaign.
After a few days of good work, yahoo kicked me. Reason, was the bad rating from Timelord 2 years ago.

When I ask him, he said this :

You may have timelord on your untrusted list but his feedback shows up and makes you -1. Take up your issue with him. If he removes the trust rating I'll see if I can get ya back in.

Now, when I approached Timelord here are his responses.

1

Sir i ask you humbly to remove or change your old red review but you add a new neutral for waking up after long time. That is fair I accept.
But sir I am no body's alternative account and your connection proof of spelling match of scammerrr is just coincidence of typing.. how can you you say that fair or proof of my account linking with someone else?

sir please consider

I *am* actually investigating your two messages; I will advise once I have completed my investigations.

2

Your red review rating will stop yahoo from accepting me.

That's three times you've said that. Yes, I am looking into it. No I will not be finished today.

When did you buy your account?

3

What do you mean buy account? This is my only account. I stopped using forum 2 or so years ago. Came back for the yobit campaign because got the email. Thought it would be nice money for christmas gift. But your rating is ruining that. I ask you to not make baseless accusations with no proof. Please thank you.

Firstly do you understand I am reviewing your case and that I am tracking down posts from quite a few years ago.
Secondly, YoBit is on the nose here on Bitcointalk and some people don't want to see the signature.
Thirdly, some other people would just tell you to fuck off.  I am looking at your request (even though you your message header should be lees confrontational and say "Please review your rating".

It's the week-end, chill. Go for a walk - enjoy the day.

4

I hope your weekend is over and you can find it in your conscience to correct your mistake.

Thank you

No mistake on my part - at any rate, who did you say is managing the campaign you want to get into?  I'd like to talk to them, thanks.

You guys can see how he thinks if i type the word scammmer withe extra letters, I become the alternate account of someone else? How ridiculous is that explanation?

It has been a week or so since my last message to this guy. Still no trial on his part to fix his mistake, instead he is trolling me in inbox.

When I say this -

Are you shitting me sir? You know very well which yahoo I am talking about.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=355846
Now if you dont remove the rating. I will have nothing to say to you anymore. I am tired of your dicking around.

he replies with this -

Now if you dont remove the rating.

You'll do what exactly?

What is more ridiculous,

Not being able to take part in Yahoo's campaign because of this rating? or the rating itself?
I ask you community, is this fair? please tell me. I create the thread in Meta so everyone can see it. If this is wrong section, then please tell me.

[1713993520]

1713993520

[1713993520]

1713993520

[1713993520]

1713993520

[1713993520]

1713993520

[suchmoon]

Timelord2067 is not in DT. Maybe yahoo62278 forgot to add ";dt" when checking the ratings.

[minime0105]

Timelord2067 is not in DT. Maybe yahoo62278 forgot to add ";dt" when checking the ratings.

It is not matter of whether he is DT or not. He can be Dt if you experienced people put him in there. But is this a logical thinking? type a word with extra letters and you become an alternate of someone?
If I sneeze like suchmoon, do I become suchmoon?

[hilariousandco]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

[minime0105]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

So why is yahoo adding him to his trust list and punishing me? Look at my post history. Do I spam? Do I create bad post? Then why exclude me from earning opportunity?

[suchmoon]

So why is yahoo adding him to his trust list and punishing me? Look at my post history. Do I spam? Do I create bad post? Then why exclude me from earning opportunity?

Timelord2067 is not in yahoo's trust list either and shouldn't be showing up even on his 2nd level. So there must be some misunderstanding. Let's wait for him to respond.

[yahoo62278]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

So why is yahoo adding him to his trust list and punishing me? Look at my post history. Do I spam? Do I create bad post? Then why exclude me from earning opportunity?

I do not have Timelord in my trust list. Just went through it to make sure, but that doesn't mean I don't trust some of his ratings. He's right more often then wrong when linking accounts. Does he have a piss poor attitude? Of course, he does. That still doesn't make him wrong in most cases.

Your rating is a little odd I agree but at the time of your removal I had been removing almost everyone with neg trust that shows up when I look from the campaign.

Regardless, you were removed from cryptotalk and the admin has not responded to my request to add other users back, so your result would still be the same. There are other campaigns out there you can try to get a spot in, this is not really a Meta issue either.

[DireWolfM14]

Lol, this is sort of timely, so I'm just going to quote myself from what I wrote on Timelord's trust page just last week (positive review, mind you:)

Timelord2067 puts a lot of effort into exposing fraudulent behavior, and I find his efforts are a tremendous contribution to the health of the community. I may not always agree with his findings, and think his personality can be a bit abrasive at times. If one can look past that it becomes clear he cares about this forum.

I must admit this is one of those situations were I find myself disagreeing with Timelord.  

Intentional mis-spelling of a word like "scammer" by placing multiple Rs at the end is not that uncommon, in my opinion.  It reminds me of how my siblings and I would tease my mother about her accent.  Rolling Rs at the end of a word is still an inside joke in my family.  I recon it's more common among those who's native language is of Latin or Middle Eastern origin, and can therefor look odd to those who's native language is of Germanic origin.

[Stack23]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

So why is yahoo adding him to his trust list and punishing me? Look at my post history. Do I spam? Do I create bad post? Then why exclude me from earning opportunity?

How does removing from the campaign should make you lost an earning opportunity ?  Do you only come here to earn ?

[minime0105]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

So why is yahoo adding him to his trust list and punishing me? Look at my post history. Do I spam? Do I create bad post? Then why exclude me from earning opportunity?

I do not have Timelord in my trust list. Just went through it to make sure, but that doesn't mean I don't trust some of his ratings. He's right more often then wrong when linking accounts. Does he have a piss poor attitude? Of course, he does. That still doesn't make him wrong in most cases.

Your rating is a little odd I agree but at the time of your removal I had been removing almost everyone with neg trust that shows up when I look from the campaign.

Regardless, you were removed from cryptotalk and the admin has not responded to my request to add other users back, so your result would still be the same. There are other campaigns out there you can try to get a spot in, this is not really a Meta issue either.

I do not understand. Are you kicking me out of this campaign for an irrelevant "odd" rating? Or because I did something genuinely wrong? Please be a little more clear. Should I give up hope of joining a campaign because you place more trust in the review of a bully like Timelord, not respond to 3 of my messages and now come here to say a long explanation that does not provide any clear answer.

It is very lazy of you to say me to join other campaign when I could be blocked from joining other campaign because of my low activity on this forum, which is again because of the arrogant bully timelord.

Please tell me if I should continue to hope to be back in this campaign. If not, then I need a proper answer as to why I was kicked. I have followed all the rules of this campaign so why should I be barred from participating if I break no rules? I want fairness nothing more.

[DireWolfM14]

It is very lazy of you to say me to join other campaign when I could be blocked from joining other campaign because of my low activity on this forum, which is again because of the arrogant bully timelord.

Why does your activity have anything to do with Timelord?  His rating is untrusted, so it's not even affecting your trust score.

Look here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=778786;dt

In comparison, look how many negative untrusted ratings I have: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2003859;dt
It hasn't affected me in the slightest.  I'm not whining every time I'm called a "scammer" or "hacked account" and it certainly hasn't affected how much time I spend on the forum.

If you come out of the woodwork just to spam the forum only because there's a sig campaign that has low standards, don't be surprised if the rest of the community takes exception to that.  

[minime0105]

It is very lazy of you to say me to join other campaign when I could be blocked from joining other campaign because of my low activity on this forum, which is again because of the arrogant bully timelord.

Why does your activity have anything to do with Timelord?  His rating is untrusted, so it's not even affecting your trust score.

Look here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=778786;dt

In comparison, look how many negative untrusted ratings I have: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2003859;dt
It hasn't affected me in the slightest, I'm not whining about every time I'm called a "scammer" or "mentally challenged" and it certainly hasn't affected how much time I spend on the forum.

If you come out of the woodwork just to spam the forum only because there's a sig campaign that has low standards, don't be surprised if the rest of the community takes exception to that. 

The point is not that. The point is why would I get kicked out of a campaign where I was following every rule? I did come out of the wood but I did not spam. I even earn merit from suchmoon when I come back. So why should everyone else get a chance to earn from that campaign and I kicked out because of one bully?

I dont expect the community to stick out their neck for me. Not many people know me here. But I hope at least the man that is managing a large campaign like this, would be fair. Am I wrong to assume that?

[Vispilio]

I thought the philosophies of a libertarian forum like this would be more in line with famous jurist William Blackstone's ratio:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."


I have Timelord on ignore and distrust for a long time now, and even so I can recall at least 10 cases when he has shown the judgement skills of a toddler.

And astoundingly enough, you have experienced and "well trusted" members of this community who still come up with gems such as "his efforts are a tremendous contribution to the health of the community", at the expense of inflicting completely unfair injuries against valuable and totally innocent members of the forum: minime0105 in this case

It is 100% irrational stuff like this that makes a lot of people suspect there is foul play going on in how the trust system is handled in this forum. Just by reading the quoted messages in this thread alone, it would be crystal clear to any intelligent observer that minime0105 is the aggrieved party, and timelord is insane...

It would lead to the continued alienation of a lot of great members if smearing campaigns and character assassination are tacitly encouraged in this forum...

ps. @Cøbra mentioned the same problem in his tweets just the other day, and I hope @theymos is well aware that there is a steadily increasing population who think that the Default Trust system of BTT continues to be highly manipulated for a while now...

[DireWolfM14]

The point is not that. The point is why would I get kicked out of a campaign where I was following every rule? I did come out of the wood but I did not spam. I even earn merit from suchmoon when I come back. So why should everyone else get a chance to earn from that campaign and I kicked out because of one bully?

I dont expect the community to stick out their neck for me. Not many people know me here. But I hope at least the man that is managing a large campaign like this, would be fair. Am I wrong to assume that?

My first post in this thread is expressing my opinion that he's wrong in this case, and I don't feel like expressing my honest opinion is "sticking my neck out."  It's just my opinion, like Timelord's review is his own.

But I think you're missing the point of the forum.  By your own admission you only came here to earn a few sats, rather than to be a participant in the community and discussion of bitcoin.  It's my opinion that alone makes you a spammer, regardless how many merit you earn and from whom.

I thought the philosophies of a libertarian forum like this would be more in line with famous jurist William Blackstone's ratio:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

I like that, and although I don't describe myself as a libertarian I tend to agree with the sentiment.  But the trust system isn't a court of law.  No one is going to jail because Timelord leaves a negative review on his trust wall.  We are all adults, and we are all entitled to take every review any way we choose.  

I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts.  I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts.  So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution."  I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."  If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective.

[minime0105]

But I think you're missing the point of the forum.  By your own admission you only came here to earn a few sats, rather than to be a participant in the community and discussion of bitcoin.  It's my opinion that alone makes you a spammer, regardless how many merit you earn and from whom.

Well I am glad then that you are not running this forum. If this was an educational forum then okay I might have conceded to your opinion. But this is not that. I am here to make money, and I do not do that by shitposting garbage. If you think anyone that is here to not earn money, then you are living in a fool's paradise. And you alone do not represent all of the community.

Yet, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But right now it is not a contention of opinion. But what is fair and what is not. The only reason yahoo kicked me off that campaign was for this bully's rating. And I wanted to know why Yahoo entertains this bully. The answer to that is pretty much clear now.

What is not clear, is if Yahoo expects me to say goodbye to Yobit campaign because of this bully's rating or if there is a chance for me to get back earning some money legitimately like I was doing.

And i wish you stop riding the high horse by calling almost $14 per day "few satoshis". Some people do not make that per week.

[LoyceMobile]

IsTimelord2067onDTyet.tk

[sonerbo]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

The best post I have read for long time. And how ironic one staff is agree about timelord is only lord of his balls but some others are respecting him. Come on lord check my posts from 2014 and maybe you can catch something ! You can do it !

[The-One-Above-All]

READ THE ENTIRE POST AND TAKE THE ACTION YOU REALLY NEED TO BE TAKING.

Yahoo is the clear issue here not timelord and some responsibility actually sits at theymos's own feet. Yahoo removed you from the campaign right??? tell him to present his clear case that demonstrates you need to be removed, not just deferring his responsibility to proven gamed and abused metrics like this shitty old "trust" system. Bogus ratings like timelord leave ONLY MATTER because yahoo enforces this bogus crap.

This old shitty trust system should have been DELETED. The fact theymos allows PROVEN trust abuse to stay there and allows campaign managers to blatantly use those BOGUS ratings are reasons to claim you are not TRUSTWORTHY enough for their scampaigns is totally disgusting. I mean the very notion of creating a NEW system because the old system was proven to be abused and broken but then allowing the old ratings to stand and dictate a big fucking scam warning on all of your threads is MORE than weird.  That is like acknowledging people have been wrongly accused and put in prison , then just saying oh well they are in there now just fucking leave the poor bastards there in jail anyway for the fun of it.. haha

We warned theymos the flagging system is practically impotent whilst the scampaign managers will still use the gamed and abused trust ratings of their pals to ensure those DT pals and alts have a grossly fair advantage for the better campaigns. Also they have the ability on a whim to crush peoples ability to partake in paid2post and you fucking wonder why the entire forum is turning into an echo chamber??

What was the point of the flagging system it is completely impotent to stop the crushing of free speech because those campaign managers will simply continue to use the OLD and gamed/abused system to still cut people out and that will create an echo chamber here and crush free speech whilst handing the best sig spots to the scampaign managers PALS.

This is undeniable.

1. Remove the old system completely where you can be UNTRUSTWORTHY for whistle blowing on scammers
2. Remove the lemons flag because even after you remove the old shitty abused laughable trust system they will just jump on the lemons flag.


Type 2 flag and above should be the ONLY reason to claim people are untrustworthy.

These campaign managers like yahoo and hhampuz have NO ACCOUNTABILITY as you can see. They just say " oh well we can't be fucked to investigate if you are untrustworthy or not and we can't be fucked to see if your posts are of high quality or not , we will simply defer all responsibility to our PALS on DT and merit sources.

Start presenting a concrete case that campaign managers are discrimination on bogus grounds against applicants you idiots. Pointing at self elected DT scum will do nothing. You can prove they are blatant scammers and nothing will happen to them. Theymos don't care at all.

If campaign managers THEMSELVES can not demonstrate you are A FINANCIAL DANGER, or that your posts ARE NOT HIGH QUALITY but still refuse you then go after the projects themselves for employing campaign managers that are clearly corrupt and discriminating against people on bogus grounds.

Yahoo and Hhampuz are fucking clowns. They likely do not even have the capacity to discern a post of real value . Let's get some objective smart campaign managers that will give a credible reason for denial that stands up to scrutiny.

Theymos is the only person that can fix the crappy trust system, he will not. So you will need to put pressure on the PROJECTS and campaign managers to REALLY employ the more valuable posters and those that are not observably financially high risk.

Forget worrying about timelord, the guy has some very strange ideas about the trust system HOWEVER he actually is not afraid to direct those ideas to every member equally, he is not a typical DT scum bag gang member nor one spamming the typical mixing/gambling sigs.  He does at least fuck with every members equally that makes him far more suitable for DT than those that are clearly pushing double standards.

GO AFTER YAHOO he should be saying here, I will investigate the issue, I will present a strong case that will stand up to scrutiny for kicking you out. If not tell him he is corrupt and make a thread about him.

You will get nowhere going after timelord. The leverage is with the projects and the members they are entrusting with scampaign managing.


If this is a false accusation from timelord then yahoo needs to investigate and find out for himself the lazy slob or fuck off and let someone else do the campaign managing that is not discriminating on bogus grounds.

Recognize the fact here that yahoo is responsible for kicking you out, the responsibility is WITH HIM to demonstrate exactly why you should be kicked.

You have not worried about the trust abuse for years it is only relevant now YAHOO is using it as the basis to boot you out. HENCE the clear issue we have right now.

Contact theymos also perhaps once you explain it to him for the 100th time it will start to dawn on him exactly WHY the old system needs to be burned entirely along with the lemons flag.

The flagging system is great if it was a stand alone system. Since the main punishment people care about is exclusion from campaigns and the old system is still be used as a bogus excuse for that then the flagging system is completely POINTLESS and IMPOTENT.

You may think it is strange only we can recognize this clear fact. The thing is they ALL know this is  exactly how it it but like it to remain like that so pretend not to grasp/accept there is need for immediate change.

[suchmoon]

What is not clear, is if Yahoo expects me to say goodbye to Yobit campaign because of this bully's rating or if there is a chance for me to get back earning some money legitimately like I was doing.

At this point a bigger obstacle to getting back into the campaign is probably your attitude than Timelord's rating. Despite your sense of entitlement, participation a signature campaign is a privilege and not subject to forum rules. Now that your original issue has been clarified perhaps it's time for you to lock the thread and try to resolve this privately if you still disagree with yahoo62278's decision. Anybody else can only inflame the drama.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

Shit, I didn't even realize he was on DT.  Sometimes Timelord2067 finds solid, obscure connections but sometimes there's a definite air of paranoia and/or straw-grasping going on in his head.  I tend to respect him but it would probably be best if he wasn't on DT given some of his questionable feedback. 

The best post I have read for long time. And how ironic one staff is agree about timelord is only lord of his balls but some others are respecting him.

That's what happens in a free world, dude.  Opinions can and do differ--and I don't think Timelord2067 is doing anything out of malice by any means.  OP probably got a raw deal here, though I agree that he's not going to get (or deserve) much sympathy now that he's admitted his motivations for returning to the forum.  No fault of Yahoo62278, of course.

[LoyceV]

Timelord2067 is not in yahoo's trust list either and shouldn't be showing up even on his 2nd level. So there must be some misunderstanding. Let's wait for him to respond.

I haven't updated my Trust Depth list in half a year, but back in April yahoo62278 had Timelord2067 on his Depth 1.
I'll see if I can still update it, chances are the changes to the Trust scores broke it.
Update: it's updated with last week's data.

[hacker1001101001]

No fault of Yahoo62278, of course.

Just starch your eyes TP, this is a total opposite statement of the reality.

It is of course Yahoo62278's fault here for trusting on an untrusted and baseless rating and removing OP based on it. We cannot imagine how many other accounts would have been kicked previously based on such baseless ratings with no solid proves. I have to agree, Timelord came as a pretty hard dick to the OP, but his findings could be right most of the times, not this one of course.

[TECSHARE]

The point is not that. The point is why would I get kicked out of a campaign where I was following every rule? I did come out of the wood but I did not spam. I even earn merit from suchmoon when I come back. So why should everyone else get a chance to earn from that campaign and I kicked out because of one bully?

I dont expect the community to stick out their neck for me. Not many people know me here. But I hope at least the man that is managing a large campaign like this, would be fair. Am I wrong to assume that?

My first post in this thread is expressing my opinion that he's wrong in this case, and I don't feel like expressing my honest opinion is "sticking my neck out."  It's just my opinion, like Timelord's review is his own.

But I think you're missing the point of the forum.  By your own admission you only came here to earn a few sats, rather than to be a participant in the community and discussion of bitcoin.  It's my opinion that alone makes you a spammer, regardless how many merit you earn and from whom.

I thought the philosophies of a libertarian forum like this would be more in line with famous jurist William Blackstone's ratio:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

I like that, and although I don't describe myself as a libertarian I tend to agree with the sentiment.  But the trust system isn't a court of law.  No one is going to jail because Timelord leaves a negative review on his trust wall.  We are all adults, and we are all entitled to take every review any way we choose.  

I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts.  I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts.  So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution."  I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."  If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective.

So exactly why is it you running a business here and making your trust system choices on your own "selfish reasons" is A-OK, but because a regular contributing member wants to earn a few Satoshis on a signature campaign, that is just despicable? Fuck everyone else, you got yours right? Legitimate users put a lot of time, monetary risk, and effort into building a reputation here. If that is not treated seriously then all you are going to get is a deluge of bought accounts because anyone who dares to do it right is perpetually incentivized not to. Or they simply just leave because their investment can be burned at the drop of a hat by control freaks like Timelord that more than anything just love to have people begging them to have their property restored, most often as users without the knowledge or community connections to resist in any way.

[hilariousetc]

I do not have Timelord in my trust list. Just went through it to make sure, but that doesn't mean I don't trust some of his ratings. He's right more often then wrong when linking accounts. Does he have a piss poor attitude? Of course, he does. That still doesn't make him wrong in most cases.

He might have some good investigations under his belt but his ratings are kinda invalidated when he'll throw out negatives based on little more than some ludicrous coincidences he thinks he sees.

I have Timelord on ignore and distrust for a long time now, and even so I can recall at least 10 cases when he has shown the judgement skills of a toddler.

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see. If he left those alone and only left negative after thorough investigations with evidence more than someone was registered in same huge time frame he sets himself then I wouldn't have a problem with him other than his petty attitude.

And astoundingly enough, you have experienced and "well trusted" members of this community who still come up with gems such as "his efforts are a tremendous contribution to the health of the community", at the expense of inflicting completely unfair injuries against valuable and totally innocent members of the forum

They are probably just looking at the decent investigations he has done and overlooking all the bad ones.

It is 100% irrational stuff like this that makes a lot of people suspect there is foul play going on in how the trust system is handled in this forum.

I wouldn't go that far. I think this is a case of where exclusions work. I excluded him a long time ago because half his feedback's were wildly inaccurate as have several others.

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

Shit, I didn't even realize he was on DT.  Sometimes Timelord2067 finds solid, obscure connections but sometimes there's a definite air of paranoia and/or straw-grasping going on in his head.  I tend to respect him but it would probably be best if he wasn't on DT given some of his questionable feedback.  

I'm not sure he was on DT but maybe someone yahoo trusted put him on their trustlist. I wouldn't have an issue with timelord being on DT if he didn't leave all the other grossly inaccurate ratings that unfortunately they spoil the lot.

[DireWolfM14]

So exactly why is it you running a business here and making your trust system choices on your own "selfish reasons" is A-OK,

There is no connection between my "trust system choices" and running my business.  Provide evidence to the contrary if you want to make that claim.

but because a regular contributing member wants to earn a few Satoshis on a signature campaign, that is just despicable?

By his own admission he isn't a "regular contributing member" is he?

Legitimate users put a lot of time, monetary risk, and effort into building a reputation here.

Are we still talking about the OP, or are we talking about your insatiable desire to be on DT1?

If that is not treated seriously then all you are going to get is a deluge of bought accounts because anyone who dares to do it right is perpetually incentivized not to. Or they simply just leave because their investment can be burned at the drop of a hat by control freaks like Timelord that more than anything just love to have people begging them to have their property restored, most often as users without the knowledge or community connections to resist in any way.

Grasping at straws to make a connection, and sounding like a "broken record" (your words, not mine) while you're at it, but I'll entertain a response none the less.

Timelord2067 isn't burning any accounts.  He's 9 votes down in the hole from reaching DT2.  His reviews aren't ruining anyone's account any more than the reviews left by game-protect.  If a campaign manager chose to not allow members into his campaign due to the reviews left by game-protect, who are we to argue?  It's his campaign to run anyway he chooses.  There's no obligation for any campaign manger to allow anyone into their campaign, no matter how much you may dislike the decision.

But, that's not what this is really about, we both know it.  So please, next time you want to attack me for my vote to cast you off DT1 just start a fresh topic about that subject.  Trying to constantly tie it into other topics is a thinly veiled strategy of yours and we're both likely to have our replies removed.

[Timelord2067]

...

hilariousandco is just Butt Hurt ^TM that I posted on his Trust feedback wall his two alts in the Known alts thread (ironically it was the user ColderThanIce that made the connection, ). I'm disappointed @theymos never took action when hilariousandcowas caught out making alterations to my signature not long after that.

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see. If he left those alone and only left negative after thorough investigations with evidence more than someone was registered in same huge time frame he sets himself then I wouldn't have a problem with him other than his petty attitude.

I've never said "same year" - I've said same day, or in a eg seventy-two hour window, but not because of the same "year" - It shows you haven't read my posts, just clicked reply and flame.


I think it was @iasenko who started a thread investigating alts using the same misspelled words, or, turn of phrase - some of you good people using mock indignation now are active participants in that thread, so does that make you hypocrites?

...

The last time I checked quoting PM's without permission was a no-no in this forum.


I PM'ed yahoo62278 and the reply (which I won't quote as it's a PM) was along the line of he is flooded with PM's from people and therefore does not have the time to address one person's issues.

IsTimelord2067onDTyet.tk

Your last weekly update has ten UID's on my list, so unless the last one is banned, then it should say "yes" (unless I'm missing something?)


Thanks to those who've spoken positively for me, it's appreciated.

Other than that TL;DR

[legendster]

Other than Direwolf, no one has spoken positively about you @TimeLord.

Right now I can see your rating on minime's profile so you must be on the list of someone I trust. Seeing how solid and clear your judgment is in this case, you don't deserve to be on my default list.

See, I don't matter in this forum, cuz not many people have me on their trust list. But even if there is one guy that is trusting me, I can't let them be influenced by your flawed logic.

Sure, you are good for the forum, in a limited way, but you do more harm than damage. After going through this thread and reading everything thoroughly, I am now considering including you in my Lepers thread.

I hope you fix this issue with OP. And I hope to see you work for the betterment of this forum and not turn it into a cesspool of egomaniacs.

[LoyceV]

Your last weekly update has ten UID's on my list, so unless the last one is banned, then it should say "yes" (unless I'm missing something?)

See here.

Right now I can see your rating on minime's profile so you must be on the list of someone I trust.

My update is still not finished yet, but I can already see you have Timelord2067 on your Depth 1 (the same as yahoo62278 has).
I've said it before: a custom Trust list has large recursive implications, and I'm sure most users have no idea who's on their Depth 1, let alone their Depth 2!

[legendster]

Your last weekly update has ten UID's on my list, so unless the last one is banned, then it should say "yes" (unless I'm missing something?)

See here.

Right now I can see your rating on minime's profile so you must be on the list of someone I trust.

My update is still not finished yet, but I can already see you have Timelord2067 on your Depth 1 (the same as yahoo62278 has).
I've said it before: a custom Trust list has large recursive implications, and I'm sure most users have no idea who's on their Depth 1, let alone their Depth 2!

I see him on depth 1 but I don't know which of my trusted user is actually trusting this guy. If dmrdmr could come up with a visual representation of user specific trust list (web of trust?) then it would be so much easier to see. Or maybe you can do it @LoyceV

In any case, I was wondering if you could make one of these for me : IsTimelord2067onDTyet.tk - lol I know not many people have taken the pain to include me in their TL so it would be useless and makes no sense to create one.

[hilariousetc]

...

hilariousandco is just Butt Hurt ^TM that I posted on his Trust feedback wall his two alts in the Known alts thread (ironically it was the user ColderThanIce that made the connection, ).

One: Why have you trademarked Butt Hurt? Two: Why would I be butthurt© over you posting on my trust wall that? It was pretty moronic and redundant though when I've already publicly posted about them in the feedback section and everyone knows they're my accounts. Three: There was no "connection" to be made.

I'm disappointed @theymos never took action when hilariousandcowas caught out making alterations to my signature not long after that.

lolwut?

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see. If he left those alone and only left negative after thorough investigations with evidence more than someone was registered in same huge time frame he sets himself then I wouldn't have a problem with him other than his petty attitude.

I've never said "same year" - I've said same day, or in a eg seventy-two hour window, but not because of the same "year" - It shows you haven't read my posts, just clicked reply and flame.

I used to read them all the time. You've made plenty of wild unbacked accusations in the past and used ludicrously large time frames as some sort of evidence, far larger than 24-72 hours as you claim.

[The-One-Above-All]

...

hilariousandco is just Butt Hurt ^TM that I posted on his Trust feedback wall his two alts in the Known alts thread (ironically it was the user ColderThanIce that made the connection, ). I'm disappointed @theymos never took action when hilariousandcowas caught out making alterations to my signature not long after that.

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see. If he left those alone and only left negative after thorough investigations with evidence more than someone was registered in same huge time frame he sets himself then I wouldn't have a problem with him other than his petty attitude.

I've never said "same year" - I've said same day, or in a eg seventy-two hour window, but not because of the same "year" - It shows you haven't read my posts, just clicked reply and flame.


I think it was @iasenko who started a thread investigating alts using the same misspelled words, or, turn of phrase - some of you good people using mock indignation now are active participants in that thread, so does that make you hypocrites?

...

The last time I checked quoting PM's without permission was a no-no in this forum.


I PM'ed yahoo62278 and the reply (which I won't quote as it's a PM) was along the line of he is flooded with PM's from people and therefore does not have the time to address one person's issues.

IsTimelord2067onDTyet.tk

Your last weekly update has ten UID's on my list, so unless the last one is banned, then it should say "yes" (unless I'm missing something?)


Thanks to those who've spoken positively for me, it's appreciated.

Other than that TL;DR

Interesting post. What do you mean caught making changes to your signature? How could he make changes to YOUR signature?

This is why timelord is better than most DT members. The guy is simply a wrecking machine regardless of who you are. Totally an asshole but an asshole to everyone equally. This is a step up from the colluding scum on dt currently. I say get him on there although one of our friends will likely not be so keen. Still got to stir things up somehow.

Seems some others are starting to wake up now. YES MORONS this is an issue with yahoo he and ALL campaign managers NEED TO BE ACCOUNTABLE for their own actions. If they kick you off for being financially high risk (not trustworthy) then they better be able to back that up, and better have NO OTHER people on there that are AS HIGH OR HIGHER RISK or else they are corrupt and need removing.

[TECSHARE]

So exactly why is it you running a business here and making your trust system choices on your own "selfish reasons" is A-OK,

There is no connection between my "trust system choices" and running my business.  Provide evidence to the contrary if you want to make that claim.

but because a regular contributing member wants to earn a few Satoshis on a signature campaign, that is just despicable?

By his own admission he isn't a "regular contributing member" is he?

Legitimate users put a lot of time, monetary risk, and effort into building a reputation here.

Are we still talking about the OP, or are we talking about your insatiable desire to be on DT1?

If that is not treated seriously then all you are going to get is a deluge of bought accounts because anyone who dares to do it right is perpetually incentivized not to. Or they simply just leave because their investment can be burned at the drop of a hat by control freaks like Timelord that more than anything just love to have people begging them to have their property restored, most often as users without the knowledge or community connections to resist in any way.

Grasping at straws to make a connection, and sounding like a "broken record" (your words, not mine) while you're at it, but I'll entertain a response none the less.

Timelord2067 isn't burning any accounts.  He's 9 votes down in the hole from reaching DT2.  His reviews aren't ruining anyone's account any more than the reviews left by game-protect.  If a campaign manager chose to not allow members into his campaign due to the reviews left by game-protect, who are we to argue?  It's his campaign to run anyway he chooses.  There's no obligation for any campaign manger to allow anyone into their campaign, no matter how much you may dislike the decision.

But, that's not what this is really about, we both know it.  So please, next time you want to attack me for my vote to cast you off DT1 just start a fresh topic about that subject.  Trying to constantly tie it into other topics is a thinly veiled strategy of yours and we're both likely to have our replies removed.

I am only making connections you yourself made with your own words.

I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts.  I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts.  So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution."  I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."  If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective.

Did I selectively edit anything out? It looks to me like you are saying that you value Timelord's ratings because it personally serves you economically regardless of the negative impact his irresponsible shotgun approach has on others.

No, not by his admission, by your opinion. He returned to earn in a signature campaign by his own words. Just because you unilaterally declare that as making him worthless doesn't make it so. Not everyone can feed off of the trust system parasitically like you can loan sharking. If he was not contributing to the forum HE WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO OPERATE HERE. He would be removed from the campaign for shitposting and or banned. Just because you deem his presence as worthless from your pedestal of righteousness and judgement doesn't make it so. You are both here to earn. You are not better than him.

I am talking about the OP, and the long standing culture of having no regard for the time, effort, and cost people expend building their reputations and defending them from people such as yourself preaching from a self proclaimed position of superiority justifying the destruction of this community for self serving purposes. There is a whole protection racket evolved around this forum's trust system. It would be a shame if something were to happen to your hard earned reputation for not doing what we tell you... This is a pattern that repeats over and over and over again. You think you are better than these people and you have a right to discard their grievances, because it serves you more to do so than to hear them, not because it serves the cohesiveness of the overall community.

Timelord is burning people's reputations, he is directly removing the ability to earn from people based on little to no evidence with frivolous accusations. This thread is direct evidence of the damage he is causing. I am not even criticizing Yahoos choice, I am criticizing Timelords actions, so your argument about him running the campaign anyway he likes is a non-sequitur. It is clear you are well on your way to seeing yourself as a special boy with special privileges and special rules. Just make sure you toe the line, because you know what happens to people who have their own opinions around here don't you? Yeah you do special boy.

[suchmoon]

Timelord is burning people's reputations, he is directly removing the ability to earn from people based on little to no evidence with frivolous accusations.

Timelord2067 is not in DT. He's not directly removing anything, yahoo62278 did that, and you should be appealing to him, if you insist on telling people on this forum how to run their business.

[suchmoon]

~

Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt and not assuming that you were simply lying when you said this: "he is directly removing the ability to earn from people". Timelord2067 has no such powers.

[TECSHARE]

~

Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt and not assuming that you were simply lying when you said this: "he is directly removing the ability to earn from people". Timelord2067 has no such powers.

I am a liar for making a point you disagree with am I? It would be a shame if I didn't agree with you and you had to damage my reputation now wouldn't it?

[marlboroza]

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see.

Yeah, lol, strange patterns and automatically everyone is alt account. You probably haven't read this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181603.0 it seems that he tried to say that I am lauda because we speak the same language and I am connected with some other accounts because I removed him from my trust list the same week someone else has removed him, probably because his actions caused that some users removed him the same week - but he doesn't see it like that, he automatically see some patterns.

No one should blindly trust his feedback without double and/or triple checking them, I don't mind if he starts thread with some random garbage and patterns but placing negative trust on peoples trust pages because someone posted the same word as someone else is another thing.

[DireWolfM14]

Did I selectively edit anything out?

Only form your reasoning.

It looks to me like you are saying that you value Timelord's ratings because it personally serves you economically regardless of the negative impact his irresponsible shotgun approach has on others.

Valuing his efforts and condoning his behavior aren't the same thing, which I clearly (and politely) expressed.  I don't suspect you have any issues with reading comprehension, so I think you know that.  But that doesn't serve your argument, does it?

The rest of your argument is just more postulating, playing on semantics, and throwing insults, so yeah, whatever.  You've been trying to get my goat for several weeks now, I'm not gonna let you have it.

No one should blindly trust his feedback without double and/or triple checking them

I couldn't agree more with this statement, but realistically the same could (or should) be said for most of the members of this forum.  We're all human, and we're all subject to emotional outbursts.  Some, more than others seem to have taken up the habit of turning their emotional outbursts into negative reviews.

I also agree that the accusation about you and Lauda was just silly and petty.

[The-One-Above-All]

Only ten? I haven't paid much attention to his ratings for a long time but he used to tag numerous people as alts because they were registered in the same year as some other accounts or he's found some other random pattern in their accounts that only he can see.

Yeah, lol, strange patterns and automatically everyone is alt account. You probably haven't read this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5181603.0 it seems that he tried to say that I am lauda because we speak the same language and I am connected with some other accounts because I removed him from my trust list the same week someone else has removed him, probably because his actions caused that some users removed him the same week - but he doesn't see it like that, he automatically see some patterns.

No one should blindly trust his feedback without double and/or triple checking them, I don't mind if he starts thread with some random garbage and patterns but placing negative trust on peoples trust pages because someone posted the same word as someone else is another thing.

But at the same time you have no problem at all with your friends giving negative trust for whistle blowing, or we didn't notice you objecting to SS when he said you can correctly give negative trust for liking lemons, OR INDEED you YOURSELF gave out or tried to give out red trust because you mixed 2 things a person did say in with a 3rd thing in scare quotes and they said you were lying because they never said the 3rd thing. Even many DT said you should remove it and you did in the end. Those you believe are all okay??

I think there is a good chance that you are lauda also, it is not Just because you are euro trash croatians or whatever you are, look at your history together... prior dt includes both ways, always defending each other, merits between you??, were you not previously a fortune jack spammer now gone to chipmixer? I wonder what else could be dug up. Are you not Zorrobeck also? because qs says you are.
Plenty of reason to believe you COULD be lauda really.

Anyway far more reason to have a neg than mentioning lemons, getting tricked with scare quotes or whistle blowing.


Timelord though has provided a service here if anything. He has highlighted the NEED for campaign managers to do some fucking work and investigate for themselves who is financially high risk or NOT and also be able accountable and responsible in FULL for an incorrect decision.  What is even the point of them?? get some bot if you just need x merits in the last x period of time and x trust. That would be fairer.

It matters not if the accusation is right or wrong really - people only care about their shitty sig btc dust. If you had 200 negatives from DT and you still got to chipmixer 99% of people would not care less.

Actually this entire matter is just what we needed for our next meta debate. Yahoo is fully responsible and is being PAID TO BE fully responsible for his decisions.

Anyway the question is answered is it not? he is not currently on DT but he should be. He may have some strange views but he takes those views equally and fairly with ALL MEMBERS.

Campaign managers currently throw accountability over to DT, DT throw accountability to each other ( never find fault with each other) and theymos throws accountability to merit sources when you boil it right down and they are mostly DT. There is NO POINT of accountability AT ALL. LOL  Hence why since there is money on the table the entire thing is a shit show.

Before becoming a critic of timelord I suggest you start look at the proven scammers who abuse the trust system far more who happen to be your PALS or perhaps are even you yourself. Get a mirror.


The reader should certainly ignore direposter he will say or do anything to stay in the merit circle spamming his chipmixer or dodgy loan shark rates business to punish the very poorest here with super high interest charges makes the banking system look like santa.

[yahoo62278]

Timelord though has provided a service here if anything. He has highlighted the NEED for campaign managers to do some fucking work and investigate for themselves who is financially high risk or NOT and also be able accountable and responsible in FULL for an incorrect decision.  What is even the point of them?? get some bot if you just need x merits in the last x period of time and x trust. That would be fairer.

Let's start with this, Noone asked Timelord or anyone else to investigate anything to my knowledge. These guys do it to feel important, do something useful with their time, gain trust in the community, or whatever other reason they may have. Regardless of their reasons, they do the investigating for themselves. The only users that actually gain reputation are the ones who are right more often then not. They all have made a mistake, i'm sure, and have left a bad or wrong feedback.

Your argument could also work against forum staff and users that report posts. Noone is asked to report posts, and it could be construed as the moderators JOB to do the work that others are doing for them. Yet users still make thousands of reports per week essentially making it where moderators only have to handle reports.

Basically quite a few users of the forum that include regular users, staff, and DT work together and try to make the forum a better place. Lot's of them do it for no money at all. Lot's of them do it for themselves, not for recognition. Users such as yourself come along and start posting crap due to you feel you were slighted in some way and that's not normally the case. Users choose who they want to be on this forum. If you act shady, you normally end up caught.

It matters not if the accusation is right or wrong really - people only care about their shitty sig btc dust. If you had 200 negatives from DT and you still got to chipmixer 99% of people would not care less.

Actually this entire matter is just what we needed for our next meta debate. Yahoo is fully responsible and is being PAID TO BE fully responsible for his decisions.

Anyway the question is answered is it not? he is not currently on DT but he should be. He may have some strange views but he takes those views equally and fairly with ALL MEMBERS.

I have already answered my stance on why the user in question was tagged. I was removing nearly anyone who had a neg feedback at the time and gave timelord the benefit of doubt on his tag. Even though the user in question was likely removed for what you would deem, not a good reason, your opinion doesn't really matter.

I can remove a user for liking dogecoin more then bitcoin, or for posting the word no too often, or any other reason I want honestly. If  I was doing it for financial gain, then you would have a reason to attack me, but I actually lose money with each person I remove from the campaign. I actually look out for the forum vs looking out for my wallet.

Campaign managers have the final say as to whom is or isn't allowed in a campaign. The forum, staff, DT users, or noone else minus the company have any say in anything. The only time staff or the forum is going to step in is if they're killing the campaign, otherwise they do their thing and go on with life.

I am paid to be responsible for the campaign, that is correct, and I will likely make a mistake here and there. Shit happens, but you try to use any little error against everyone and act like its a huge conspiracy against you or other users who were removed from campaigns. The fact is your opinion DOES NOT MATTER, managers and companies opinions when a campaign is started are the only opinions that matter. It's not a Democracy where everyone gets a vote, it's a dictatorship period. I think for the most part, most of us try to do a good job, but noone is entitled to be allowed in a campaign. Not you, not theymos, not me, not anyone. That decision is made by the manager and the company alone. When a manger is hired they are basically given total rights to everything to do with the campaign.

You sure do make reading the forum fun from time to time. It's amazing how silly you are at times. You should take a break from trying to prove false conspiracies and go have a drink or 10. Relax a bit and enjoy life.

I will not respond in this thread again guys. What's done is done and cannot be changed.

[The-One-Above-All]

@yahoo

You as per usual are completely WRONG.  Let me detail why. But it seems you already RAN AWAY. Let's hope you man up and return.


1. We were never on any campaign to get booted from.  So that was false.

2. Every member matters, any single member (if they can prove that you are employing double standards) can ruin your rep as campaign manager and so they should there is no place for double standards, that is corruption and dangerous for all members when dealing with new projects. Your position is VERY precarious. The project is NOT going to want lots of negative threads made about them in the title all over google. If there is clear evidence you are corrupt then that (especially when dealing with the initial distribution of tokens) means the project is wide open to manipulation and scamming. If they fail to pull you inline then the project can and should be branded a probable scam.

There is NO way to deny this. If like you say you wanted to turn some people away on the basis you have issue with the fact they like doge more than btc then that is a clear and flagrant example of a random excuse that could easily be used as a tool to selectively bring on insiders only  for that token to ensure they get ALL of the initial distribution and therefore can now manipulate that project on the exchanges and defraud innocent investors.

This is why especially regarding the initial distribution of tokens via bounties or whatever then you MUST have a CLEAR AND TRANSPARENT SET OF RULES AND CRITERIA that is applied to each member equally or it is certainly a dubious and dangerous project. Warnings about such project should certainly be raised until there is drastic effect.

3. The point you make about mods is OUR OWN POINT. The mods see the report, they are SUPPOSED to investigate it and the ACCOUNTABILITY is with THEM.  The MODS have to be accountable for the delete NOT THE REPORTER. The mod does not say oh I don't know why I deleted it you have to ask suchmoon why he reported it, I just delete whatever fatty sends us.  If you get him to say it was okay now I will put the post back. It just does not work like that.

Can you not even see the distinction??

You are paid to ensure the project is advertised by people that meet the thresholds for post quality and also weed out those that are financially high risk (or scammers). It is YOUR JOB not DT scumbags job to ensure this. The buck stops with YOU.  You can not say ... oh I refused them because timelord told me he was bad I didn't bother to investigate so I just refused him anyway then said he will need to get timelord to revise it before i will take you back.  If this job is too much for you then don't do it.

4. This is a point I have long since been pushing and it is undeniable. If you are not going to set a transparent threshold for post quality and you are NOT going to be able to justify in a way that holds up to objective scrutiny and not accept on a first come first served basis for those that pass those two requirements. Then you are left with a position that is vastly above your capability.  The argument NOT to do it that way is that they want the VERY BEST posters only and first come first served (passing the tests I mentioned) will not result in the VERY BEST POSTERS.... LOL well to discern the very best posters you would need the VERY SMARTEST PEOPLE here to discern the value and lack of value in those posts. That is not you.

5. You are very wrong that the average member can not make a stand and cause a corrupt campaign manager A LOT of trouble and any project that uses them or has used them in the past, you are also wrong that an average member can not take a stand and bring a project a lot of issue for allowing their campaign manager to act in an undeniably corrupt way. Their motivation for allowing this opens up lots of worry things for them and their investors.

If you want a demonstration of how this would work then perhaps someone will apply for one of your campaigns. The onus will be on you if they are refused, to present a case that stands up to scrutiny that

a/ the value of their posts is below the value of all those others you have accepted.
b/ that they are more of a financially high risk individual than others you have accepted.

If you fail and you either

a/ offer no explanation
b/ offer no explanation that stands up to scrutiny

Then a thread along the lines of..

IS X PROJECT KNOWINGLY EMPLOYING A CORRUPT CAMPAIGN MANAGER?? IS THE PROJECT X CORRUPT??- within the thread could be placed the evidence IE the people in your campaign that have observable instances of wrong doing, and among other things you failure to explain you refusal of entry or the total and utter crushing of your specious and bogus explanation. This can be kept updated with many new details of the types of people you regularly seem to select, their observable instances of wrong doing, your boasting that you are a dictator and that you get to do what you want, can discriminate against applicants on any basis you dream up... etc etc etc. I mean there will be no lack of updates that will clearly demonstrate all applicants are NOT BEING TREATED EQUALLY and there is corruption within the selection process and the questions that opens. ETC ETC ETC - SOON X PROJECT is on google for a big possible corruption thread

Then if the you nor the project comes to answer for that thread. You can contact the project, visit their threads and ask, why they are not acting in light of the FACT the campaign manager seems to be discriminating against certain members with no valid explanation that holds water.  Then some friends could join in and say they are very interested in why this is and WHY THERE IS NO TRANSPARENT SET OF RULES THAT IS APPLIED EVENLY TO ALL MEMBERS. They can also find other projects where perhaps the same thing is happening and save them too. Look up in the past a few people who have been annoyed in the past to get the boot on bogus grounds and bring them on with it too.

If the project does not take action then a thread with more of a statement about their knowingly employing corrupt campaign managers and therefore they are undeniably corrupt themselves with all the information and updates over and over again. More friends and disgruntled people that have been turned away.

Perhaps once this starts to happen to a lot of your projects you will find you soon have a lot less projects to manage?  I mean projects employ project managers to advertise not doom them before they start right?


Feel free yahoo to pull this thread apart anywhere you can. You will find people with zero to lose ( already being discriminated against by corrupt campaign managers) when matched against the squeaky clean rep projects want keep to get people involved is a ..................as I said very precarious position to be in. To say the ordinary member DOES NOT MATTER could not be further from the truth. It is just nobody with vast experience of hounding corrupt projects has been bothered to take action as yet.

Of course ALL OF THE ABOVE is only valid IF you are corrupt and are not applying your standards equally to all members. If you are then you will be able to explain ANY refusals you make with a cast iron case won't you??

We have vast experience with tackling corrupt projects as you may not know.  If  projects are knowingly employing corrupt campaign managers they are by default corrupt themselves.

Then again, why NOT just do your best to select people that meet a certain post quality and those you can not demonstrate are financially high risk YOURSELF.  Then, relying on the gamed and abused metrics of your pals will not get you in hot water and see and end to your campaign managing career in the near future??

Is it really too much to ask for you to employ a fair set of standards that you understand yourself and can clearly demonstrate you always adhere to?

We don't really care too much about joining your campaigns but anyone who feels they are 100% being unfairly discriminated against can follow the guide above and contact us for help at any time.

Transparent rules that ensure all members are treated equally..... and nothing fucking less will do.

It seems you and hhampuz have something to hide since both seem to be saying if we want to discriminate on bogus grounds we can and will. Is that what you are saying yahoo?  think carefully because if you can not explain your grounds of refusal in a way that stands up to scrutiny  THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.  If you can not explain your reason then your reasons are bogus. = corruption.

[TECSHARE]

Did I selectively edit anything out?

Only form your reasoning.

It looks to me like you are saying that you value Timelord's ratings because it personally serves you economically regardless of the negative impact his irresponsible shotgun approach has on others.

Valuing his efforts and condoning his behavior aren't the same thing, which I clearly (and politely) expressed.  I don't suspect you have any issues with reading comprehension, so I think you know that.  But that doesn't serve your argument, does it?

The rest of your argument is just more postulating, playing on semantics, and throwing insults, so yeah, whatever.  You've been trying to get my goat for several weeks now, I'm not gonna let you have it.

No one should blindly trust his feedback without double and/or triple checking them

I couldn't agree more with this statement, but realistically the same could (or should) be said for most of the members of this forum.  We're all human, and we're all subject to emotional outbursts.  Some, more than others seem to have taken up the habit of turning their emotional outbursts into negative reviews.

I also agree that the accusation about you and Lauda was just silly and petty.

You explicitly said you value his "contributions" for "selfish reasons" in spite of the fact his accusations are unreliable and cause harm to other users. I am sorry if you want to take that back now, but it was your own words, not "form" my reasoning. Also, you didn't bother addressing any of my other quite valid points about you acting all superior and standing in judgement of the lesser plebeians who roam this forum. Convenient you just summarily dismiss that rather than bothering to respond.

P.S. I already have your goat, and if you don't shape up I am going to let Nutilduhh have his way with him.

[Stack23]

Not being able to take part in Yahoo's campaign because of this rating? or the rating itself?
I ask you community, is this fair? please tell me. I create the thread in Meta so everyone can see it. If this is wrong section, then please tell me.

I tell you do not complain and cry. Move on, life is still on without the yobit cryptotalk campaign.

[The-One-Above-All]

Not being able to take part in Yahoo's campaign because of this rating? or the rating itself?
I ask you community, is this fair? please tell me. I create the thread in Meta so everyone can see it. If this is wrong section, then please tell me.

I tell you do not complain and cry. Move on, life is still on without the yobit cryptotalk campaign.

That is the cowards way. Stop advocating cowardly behaviors. Man up and make a stand. If something is not fair don't run away and pretend you are the bigger man for doing so. This does not just stop with yobit it goes for ANY CAMPAIGN these weasel corrupt campaign managers can be ruined at any moment and so can any project that uses them.

If I were to spot a new and interesting project that I wanted to put in my sig and yahoo turned me down and could not provide an explanation that stood up to scrutiny I would dedicate my time and bring on more friends to ensure that as many people as possible understood both him and the project that advocates his behavior are employing corrupt and unfair practices...... staying within the rules and on topic. You can be sure of that. Weeks, months or years of compounded pressure with nothing to lose against those that wish to remain squeaky clean is a very strong position to be in.

Saying that you will highlight and stand up to corruption is saying you will protect the entire board of both would be advertisers and investors. There is no other way to see it once you understand the damage that allowing gaming and corruption of the initial distribution of tokens can bring.

Start manning up , read my guild how to induce FAIR TRANSPARENT RULES SO THAT EVERY MEMBER IS TREATED EQUALLY.

If you find you are getting kicked from a project on PROVABLY unfair bias like yahoo has done here then we will assist and advice on how you can certainly make sure that this does not keep happening with other members.

Satoshi would welcome such action.

The weak and pathetic are just as guilty as the corrupt and greedy, both of whom are permitting others to suffer injustice.

Cowards run away... look at yahoo??? where is that scumbag now that we threw down a post he has no answer to?  half the people he regularly employs on his campaigns are here in the dirty turds thread UNDENIABLY guilty of being financially high risk or even outright scammers. Take a read.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5170789.0

see if any of those are, or were on yahoo's campaigns and then investigate their prior undeniable wrong doings and then see if they are worse that the " possible" wrong doings others he rejects from his campaigns.

This is the challenge we offer YAHOO but the weasel will not rise to the challenge will he???  he runs away.

Still though people are worried about the incorrectness of timelords feeback ( who is not even on dt now) when the action taken here that upset the individual was yahoo's.

Feedback means NOTHING if not enforced by the campaign managers to 99% of members here.

[DireWolfM14]

You explicitly said you value his "contributions" for "selfish reasons" in spite of the fact his accusations are unreliable and cause harm to other users. I am sorry if you want to take that back now, but it was your own words, not "form" my reasoning.

Here are my words, unedited, and not retracted:

I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."

It's only one sentence, but you selectively choose to focus on half of it.

P.S. I already have your goat, and if you don't shape up I am going to let Nutilduhh have his way with him.

Genuine lolz, that was funny.  But I have a feeling Nutildah is still having too much fun with Cryptohunter's goat.

[TECSHARE]

You explicitly said you value his "contributions" for "selfish reasons" in spite of the fact his accusations are unreliable and cause harm to other users. I am sorry if you want to take that back now, but it was your own words, not "form" my reasoning.

Here are my words, unedited, and not retracted:

I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."

It's only one sentence, but you selectively choose to focus on half of it.

P.S. I already have your goat, and if you don't shape up I am going to let Nutilduhh have his way with him.

Genuine lolz, that was funny.  But I have a feeling Nutildah is still having too much fun with Cryptohunter's goat.

https://benchristie.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/wpid-sheepstockingshigh-heels-funny-photos-and-funniest-images.jpeg

Actually I originally quoted the whole thing. The other half is not exactly exonerating you anyway. You clarify his findings are not always accurate, but you value them for selfish reasons anyway. I am not selectively focusing on anything.

This is part of the problem with this default trust nepotism protection racket. People get all hyper focused on what serves them personally and unless people are helping them everyone else can go fuck themselves, they are on their own. Knowing this attitude is prevalent others take advantage of it and pressure compliance with a core group of users pushing out anyone with a dissenting opinion, and devaluing anyone who doesn't belong to the special boys club. You said it. You also claimed that because this user returned to earn via a signature ad he is not a contributing member from your lofty special boy perch. Again, this is exactly what I meant by you abandoning your principals. It is no longer about what is fair, right, or best for the community, it is now about what serves you and protects your position. Maybe you can make some more accusations about me being desperate to be on the default trust as I continually call out those most able to place me there. Maybe no one will notice your desperation to stay on it at all costs if you project hard enough.

[DireWolfM14]

You clarify his findings are not always accurate, but you value them for selfish reasons anyway. I am not selectively focusing on anything.

Wrong.  I value his efforts, not his findings.  Words matter, you understand them, stop pretending you don't.

[TECSHARE]

The point is not that. The point is why would I get kicked out of a campaign where I was following every rule? I did come out of the wood but I did not spam. I even earn merit from suchmoon when I come back. So why should everyone else get a chance to earn from that campaign and I kicked out because of one bully?

I dont expect the community to stick out their neck for me. Not many people know me here. But I hope at least the man that is managing a large campaign like this, would be fair. Am I wrong to assume that?

My first post in this thread is expressing my opinion that he's wrong in this case, and I don't feel like expressing my honest opinion is "sticking my neck out."  It's just my opinion, like Timelord's review is his own.

But I think you're missing the point of the forum.  By your own admission you only came here to earn a few sats, rather than to be a participant in the community and discussion of bitcoin.  It's my opinion that alone makes you a spammer, regardless how many merit you earn and from whom.

I thought the philosophies of a libertarian forum like this would be more in line with famous jurist William Blackstone's ratio:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

I like that, and although I don't describe myself as a libertarian I tend to agree with the sentiment.  But the trust system isn't a court of law.  No one is going to jail because Timelord leaves a negative review on his trust wall.  We are all adults, and we are all entitled to take every review any way we choose. 

I have my reasons for valuing Timelords efforts.  I run a business here that leaves me very vulnerable to those who abuse alt accounts.  So, yeah I find "his efforts are a tremendous contribution."  I may have my selfish reasons, but I also expressed that "I may not always agree with his findings."  If you're going to quote me, please be thorough, not selective.

You clarify his findings are not always accurate, but you value them for selfish reasons anyway. I am not selectively focusing on anything.

Wrong.  I value his efforts, not his findings.  Words matter, you understand them, stop pretending you don't.

Yes, you value his efforts personally and for profit. Of course it costs you nothing if he is wrong. That is an externalized cost that is paid in the form of driving away good users, which as a result ironically ends up with more people buying accounts. Think of it like a criminal robbing a gas station. If the penalty is the same for being armed or not being armed, most criminals would choose to go further and be armed anyway knowing the penalty is equally as high either way. The same logic is true with excessive and arbitrary trust ratings and flags. People get wrapped up in relatively minor things and are more willing to just burn what they have and or go for the bigger con since they all all treated the same anyway. Basically the cons are Joker and the BitCops are Batman. They are literally creating more Jokers. Jokers will always be there but this system of frivolous shotgun ratings is literally incentivizing it.

Again, a non-intentioned con man user will usually do one of two things if they are falsely accused. They will either say fuck this place and rob whatever they can, or say fuck this place and never come back. Unfortunately the real cons are back again in seconds on a new bought account. The trust system should not be used like a sledge hammer, it should be treated like a ballpene hammer pinning down a con with a bunch of tack nails. This gives legitimate users breathing room, and will not give any realistic advantages to cons that they couldn't easily bypass. At absolute best you are burning accounts, creating value for them by reducing supply, and again incentivizing people to buy accounts and thus for others to sell them. Its like the war on drugs. Eventually the enforcement action literally becomes the mechanism by which illicit drugs have value, because the value is determined by risk, and risk is directly correlated with levels of enforcement. In short this methodology is the BitCop's, cutting the community's nose off to spite its face.

[Timelord2067]

So there must be some misunderstanding. Let's wait for him to respond.

Thread (such as it is) Archived for future reference.


Timing is everything.

I posted on the 30 October 2019, 11:54:44 (GMT +10) that I would be away until Monday the 4th of November 2019.

Am going to be on limited internet hours over the next five days - will be back around this time Monday my time (GMT +10) I'll be looking in for a few minutes at a time, but can't guarantee any transactions in next 120 hours. (and still hunting for BBcode count down that I can use here)

Some sixteen hours later at 31 October 2019, 04:32:22 (GMT +10) the OP minime0105 started this thread.  Four DT1's (not including @Vod removing his trust of me) have added their names to the distrust list that @LoyceV started.

Good for you.  Nine or thirteen DT's distrusting someone becomes meaningless numbers on a page.


Without permission the OP has posted portions of my correspondence including that I am re-investigating the Red Paint ^TM I put on their Trust wall/feedback.

Now which well know scammer do we all know that uses SCAMMMERRR!! in their comments to others?

http://archive.is/MkWaM#selection-431.0-497.20
http://archive.is/5pzrC#selection-5751.0-6157.44
http://archive.is/7uTs0#selection-4693.0-4693.10

...the EXACT same spelling mind you...

Given there are links to follow, it's pretty clear no-one has actually looked at those three links. 

3 Accounts Connected:

superSTAR777, jamesnbailey472, minime0105.

Name:    jamesnbailey472 had only Posts:    8 and was only active for three days between Date Registered:    06 November 2014, 10:38:04 and Last Active:    09 November 2014, 00:57:41 so we can't glean too much from that alts posts...

Proof:

Three users post the same turn of phrase: SCAMMMERRR!! - The proof is in the archived posts.

CASE CLOSED.

However...

As I said to the OP I am re-reviewing my notes from over the past nearly three years.  In the last few days I've recalled just how extensive the contamination of this scammer is from my notes from back then.  I'm not certain exactly why I never completed the investigation, but this time around I felt I should start the investigation afresh.

Due to this thread having been started by the impatient OP and the corresponding four or five DT's who were gullible enough to fall for the OP's Crocodile Tears I have posted some of my findings. 

20 Accounts Connected:

kabootar1234 ( +0 / =0 / -1 ), irfan_pak10 ( +6 / =1 / -0 ), superSTAR777 ( +2 / =0 / -0 ), BTCreward ( +0 / =0 / -1 ), Babba D ( +0 / =0 / -2 ), abduluk, neesa1124, superstar7777, Nauro ( +0 / =0 / -5 ), Nauro2, NxT Designs, DabbuDESIGNS, salilBH, moneynot, mallukhan, magiitr, temp_superstar777, VPScreator ( +0 / =0 / -5 ), MargonCreatives ( +0 / =1 / -5 ), margon2,

...and probably:

wangxinxi ( +0 / =2 / -1 )

via Wallet [0523ba5fba]

It's by no means complete - I wouldn't ordinarily divulge this information this early until I have gathered/recompiled much more evidence, however this thread needs to be slapped down now and the DT's called out for being gullible to the wailing's of a prolific scammer.


For the moment I'm not going to reveal too much more, but I'll ask the wowsers on DT a couple of questions:

Why did none of you perform a litmus test [1], [2] on my trust wall/feedback post?

In 30 seconds you would have seen this:

https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=minime0105      2019-09-28 8:34:03 PM    woke up         minime0105
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=superSTAR777   2019-09-30 8:01:51 PM    woke up         superSTAR777

What would the odds of two of the three scammer's alts waking up within 48 hours of each-other out of the more than 2.6 million other BCT UID accounts?


In my notes it looks as though nearly all UID's that contain the term

Code:

minime

in their profile name are quite likely alts.


A year ago, (BPIP again) this happened:

02 May 2018, 00:30:52 Date Registered:       Minime1985
2018-05-03 6:04:56 PM    woke up         superSTAR777
2018-05-04 7:33:44 AM    password changed   BTCreward
2018-05-08 6:15:15 AM    password changed   VPScreator
2018-05-12 8:16:13 AM    password changed   minime0105
2018-05-12 8:20:21 AM    password changed   minime0105
14 May 2018, 15:24:41 Date Registered:       minimeee
28 May 2018, 05:43:23 Last Active:        raderhamart

How coincidental is it that again two of the three scammer alts (plus other alts) are active in such a short period of time either waking up, or, changing their passwords?


Or, what about:

September 29, 2018, 09:41:11 PM Last actual active: minime0105
2018-09-30 9:29:30 PM    woke up         MargonCreatives
01 October 2018, 08:00:00 Last Active:       MargonCreatives


Is that just not coincidental enough for you good people on DT?  Naturally, had I been alllowed to complete my re-investigation I would be able to divulge further information.  But now you'll have to wait; threatening me as legendster has done isn't going to incentivise me to get the job done any quicker.

@legendster - We have a name for people like you here in Australia: Gunna!

legendster says he's Gunna! add me to his list. legendster says he's Gunna! do this, he's Gunna! do that he's Gunna!Gunna!Gunna! do things.

Go right ahead.

Your three options are

• legendster can create a scam accusation - he says he's Gunna! target "only for them to screw with someone for a big amount"
  
  Those people are called scammers.  You can post a scam accusation against me in the so named thread.
  
  Here is the correct form you'll need to use:
  
  

Code:

b][color=black]What happened:: [/color][/b]

[b][color=black]Scammers Profile Link: [/color][/b]

[b][color=black]Reference Link: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Amount Scammed: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Payment Method: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Proof of Payment: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]PM/Chat Logs: [/color][/b]
[b][color=black]Additional Notes: [/color][/b]

(good luck with that by the way)

[/li]

• You can ramp it up and create a flag against me by clicking here.
• OR, if you are brave enough, you can join Cryptorianx in supporting this Flag already started against me...

Wot ya Gunna! do - legendster?


@suchmoon @hilariousandco @hilariousetc @TECSHARE @minifrij @xtraelv @Stack23 @The-One-Above-All @The Pharmacist @hacker1001101001 - any questions?

[marlboroza]

What is connection between OP and other accounts?

[LoyceV]

Good for you.  Nine or thirteen DT's distrusting someone becomes meaningless numbers on a page.

Although this is indeed meaningless to DefaultTrust, it's not meaningless to (some) users with a custom Trust list. Due to it's large recursive implications, several people including yahoo62278 had you on their Depth 1 (or Depth 2). If they don't want that, excluding you isn't meaningless to them.
As of last Saturday, yahoo62278 didn't exclude Timelord2067 yet. I can't tell if that changed more recently.

[irfan_pak10]

Who the f* is this guy. He connected me with 20 other people whom I never made a contact ever except for superstar which is in 2015

[Timelord2067]

Good for you.  Nine or thirteen DT's distrusting someone becomes meaningless numbers on a page.

Although this is indeed meaningless to DefaultTrust, it's not meaningless to (some) users with a custom Trust list. Due to it's large recursive implications, several people including yahoo62278 had you on their Depth 1 (or Depth 2). If they don't want that, excluding you isn't meaningless to them.
As of last Saturday, yahoo62278 didn't exclude Timelord2067 yet. I can't tell if that changed more recently.

Nice to know some people value my work. 

yet

Interesting.

[TECSHARE]

What is connection between OP and other accounts?

Seems like they said "SCAMMMERRR!!", and woke up within 24 hours of each other, clearly case closed.

[Timelord2067]

What is connection between OP and other accounts?

Seems like they said "SCAMMMERRR!!", and woke up within 24 hours of each other, clearly case closed.

Thank you for your support TECSHARE - as I've been trying to explain I am rebuilding my work on these users - one of the things I never did at the time was archive my work, so I am having to go through dozens of posts and archive everything which is slow going.

Given some people in this thread seem to still have lingering doubts, this is just one example of connections to other scam accounts:

4 Accounts Connected:

w40ut (loan default), minime0105 (the OP of this thread), x2Bitcoin (Ponzi), GoodMorningVietnam (coding scam), 

Proof:

Code:

w40ut

is the username these UID's use to claim from various campaigns.

• w40ut uses the username w40ut here: [1],
• minime0105 uses the username w40ut here: [1], [2], [3]
• GoodMorningVietnam uses the username w40ut here: [1] (their Skype/Facebook profile)

Miscellaneous:

w40ut defaulted on a loan: http://archive.ph/v1vhI#selection-4799.0-4799.29


Lutpin identifies x2Bitcoin as being an alt of w40ut through a Ponzi website.


GoodMorningVietnam receives six negative feedback/trust wall posts over a two month period for a coding scam.



(all of this pre-dates my Red Paint ^TM on minime0105's trust/feedback wall...)

 

[marlboroza]

Who the f* is this guy. He connected me with 20 other people whom I never made a contact ever except for superstar which is in 2015

You used the same btc addy to receive payment as one of connected accounts. Looks like solid connection unless you have something to add here and as you are on dt I am going to counter your negative for now.

@timelord someone posting the same words is usually not good connection 

[hacker1001101001]

@Timelord, I value some of your findings and respect your years of work on alts. But as per your explanation here about the connection OP should be labeled as an scammer or alt ( as per your feedback ) because he has used the word SCAMMER with same spelling like other users registered at around same time. This really doesn't look logical does it ?

Rather, I would like to help you getting this out.

minime0105 is not to be trusted person if you see in his history on the forum.

He created a thread here to pay for captcha work to the users who will do this for him.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1450199.0

But he still never paid them or answered there.

This surely looks like a breach of contract and some of the victim in that thread could start a type 3 flag for violation of a contract. A type 1 flag still suits here if I am not wrong.

Just want to say that the connections you are applying are pretty much weak here to be taken into consideration.

[Timelord2067]

@Timelord, I value some of your findings and respect your years of work on alts. But as per your explanation here about the connection OP should be labeled as an scammer or alt ( as per your feedback ) because he has used the word SCAMMER with same spelling like other users registered at around same time. This really doesn't look logical does it ?

Perhaps not, but as the OP him/herself showed in the PM's they posted without permission, I am working (and believe me, it's been slow work) to gather all the evidence I never put together in 2016. 

Rather, I would like to help you getting this out.

minime0105 is not to be trusted person if you see in his history on the forum.

He created a thread here to pay for captcha work to the users who will do this for him.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1450199.0

But he still never paid them or answered there.

This surely looks like a breach of contract and some of the victim in that thread could start a type 3 flag for violation of a contract. A type 1 flag still suits here if I am not wrong.

IIRC There are threads offering to place flags.  Like with this connection most of the flags that I have created have received little or no support.  Not sure if that's because they have been overshadowed by other flags, or, other reasons.

Just want to say that the connections you are applying are pretty much weak here to be taken into consideration.

Hopefully it won't be like the search for Lasseter's Gold.

@timelord someone posting the same words is usually not good connection 

Thank you for your support - I'll be sure to keep that in mind from now on.


Had I completed my earlier investigation and placed a negative for this back in 2016

4 Accounts Connected:

w40ut (loan default), minime0105 (captcha workers), x2Bitcoin (Ponzi), GoodMorningVietnam (coding scam), 

we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

[mole0815]

Please tell me if I should continue to hope to be back in this campaign.

if you can only see "removed from campaign by moderator" at https://yobit.net/en/signature/ then you have to check this off and forget about it.
as you can see here i had the same problem... or i still have it. yahoo can't help that either. the people in charge of the campaign have no interest in the individual fate. it's best to look for alternatives and don't worry too much about it (even if it's not always that easy)
the other points have already been discussed in detail. just wanted to say a few words about the CT campaign.

[Timelord2067]

...

Perhaps you might like to use your DT1 powers to start tagging all of these alts of minime0105?

Awesome performance
i have decided some time ago to take action against bounty abuse etc. as good as i can. since i am DT1 this also has more sense and will be used in the future for the right things.

i started with this and rated all users including you. that alone was a big effort. but compared to the time and energy you spend on it negligible.
i say thank you and continue like this

Perfect example of why timelord shouldn't be on DT and nobody should pay attention to his ratings.

The best post I have read for long time. And how ironic one staff is agree about timelord is only lord of his balls but some others are respecting him. Come on lord check my posts from 2014 and maybe you can catch something ! You can do it !

Should I start with DankCoins or BTCBLOGGER? "b234FEzz" anyone?


Your wish is my command!

3 Accounts Connected:

bitkoyun, sonerbo, sonerbo1

[irfan_pak10]

Who the f* is this guy. He connected me with 20 other people whom I never made a contact ever except for superstar which is in 2015

You used the same btc addy to receive payment as one of connected accounts. Looks like solid connection unless you have something to add here and as you are on dt I am going to counter your negative for now.

@timelord someone posting the same words is usually not good connection 

Here is my proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg53022550#msg53022550

[Vispilio]

Here is my proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg53022550#msg53022550

Now that irfan pak has demonstrated, perhaps for the 20th time in the last couple of months alone, what an incredibly lame and chronically false job TimeSink is doing with his pseudo detective "work",

it would be the ethical thing to do for anyone who wrote laudatory feedback to TimeSink under the guise of "countering" irfan pak's provably correct assessment of him to now remove those fake positive ratings.

[Timelord2067]

Had I completed my earlier investigation and placed a negative for this back in 2016

4 Accounts Connected:

w40ut (loan default), minime0105 (captcha workers), x2Bitcoin (Ponzi), GoodMorningVietnam (coding scam), 

we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

Case #1 (of this post)

2 Accounts Connected:

w40ut (loan default), iTeachYouLearn (Scammer and "thief") via Wallet [064feb3f91]

Proof:

Wallet [064feb3f91] contains the following wallet addresses:

Code:

1KDcJ27dTDhXpb52tWS4Y4dFmaceswVc2N	0.         	612	530607
16e5g5jvm4R1B61YWmTxFmz2Jt3jbFJQnP	0.         	36	390811
19Kupgx9fAb6nmnXAQqEJ92CLzqHsk81H1	0.         	30	389871
1Tiago6fdrK6bP3oVGcN64mqWNS4VFx8i	0.         	30	374195
14JkkLaCXaKR1y1CWjAhq9PQbi19TzKAwY	0.         	8	382622
15TA8Qd5K769ghJVjUZJQQYWbG71gxZZg6	0.         	3	383121
1DxYfQZPxPVTX1xbBzoifqnBFcxUEEPE7J	0.         	3	362915
1F3GdEXMXgW1pxEY6cgj7ZNTqJeENrt8zm	0.         	2	381776
16z5pqgvFv8Pv4ZUo8Qtc1Vkehpa6ci3jr	0.         	1	380490

• w40ut uses the following wallet addresses:
  
  
  • 1KDcJ27dTDhXpb52tWS4Y4dFmaceswVc2N here: [1], [2],
  • 1DxYfQZPxPVTX1xbBzoifqnBFcxUEEPE7J here: [1],
  • 1F3GdEXMXgW1pxEY6cgj7ZNTqJeENrt8zm here: [1],
  • http://archive.ph/K2cQj#selection-6067.0-6067.34
• iTeachYouLearn uses the following wallet addresses:
  
  
  • 16e5g5jvm4R1B61YWmTxFmz2Jt3jbFJQnP here: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6],
  • 19Kupgx9fAb6nmnXAQqEJ92CLzqHsk81H1 here: [1], [2 (Heutenamos also posts but does not take out a loan)], [3], [4], [5], [6],

None of the other wallet addresses have been used on BCT from what I can tell.


Case #2 (of this post)

3 Accounts Connected:

minime0105 (captcha workers), gargaho01, ATeam,

Proof:

All three users use the user name

Code:

gargaho01

• gargaho01 uses the name here: [1], [2],
• minime0105 uses the name here: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]
• ATeam uses the name here: [1], [2], [3]

Case #3

w40ut (loan defaulter), - SpaceMan, - SpaceMan2,

- SpaceMan has two unresolved scam accusations against them [1], [2],

Related Addresses:

w40ut uses the Skype address tiagoleal99 while

Code:

- SpaceMan

uses tiagoleal99  in their email address.

- SpaceMan (including the preceding dash) like minime0105 starts a captcha workers thread then somehow scams a participant for a loan which they never pay back.

28 March 2016, 21:11:01 Date Registered:    - SpaceMan   142
30 March 2016, 00:50:02 Date Registered:    - SpaceMan2
30 March 2016, 02:24:16 Last Active:       - SpaceMan2
31 March 2016, 03:48:37 Date Registered:    x2Bitcoin
31 March 2016, 22:18:01 Last Active:       x2Bitcoin

28 April 2016, 17:21:29 Date Registered:    ATeam   25
May 01, 2016, 01:26:57 PM Last actual post:   - SpaceMan
02 May 2016, 08:14:55 Last Active:       iTeachYouLearn
08 May 2016, 22:03:01 Last Active:       - SpaceMan

I'm throwing in - SpaceMan2 (activity zero) simply because of their close registration time to - SpaceMan


w40ut uses the email

Code:

gandalfleal@gmail.com

here: [Archive]

iTeachYouLearn sold a steam account for $3 then took it back here: [Archive]

The account name was

Code:

gandalfleal

So far we have the following:

19 June 2015, 22:24:08 Date Registered:    w40ut

28 October 2015, 11:58:32   w40ut defaults on a loan
29 October 2015, 08:52:32 Date Registered:    iTeachYouLearn   230

07 December 2015, 02:20:28 Date Registered:    gargaho01   13

28 April 2016, 17:21:29 Date Registered:    ATeam   25

09 February 2016, 17:28:18 Last Active:    gargaho01
21 February 2016, 22:32:05 Date Registered:    minime0105

28 March 2016, 21:11:01 Date Registered:    - SpaceMan   142
30 March 2016, 00:50:02 Date Registered:    - SpaceMan2
30 March 2016, 02:24:16 Last Active:       - SpaceMan2
31 March 2016, 03:48:37 Date Registered:    x2Bitcoin
31 March 2016, 22:18:01 Last Active:       x2Bitcoin

28 April 2016, 17:21:29 Date Registered:    ATeam   25
May 01, 2016, 01:26:57 PM Last actual post:   - SpaceMan
02 May 2016, 08:14:55 Last Active:       iTeachYouLearn
08 May 2016, 22:03:01 Last Active:       - SpaceMan

18 September 2016, 02:28:37 Date Registered:    GoodMorningVietnam
29 September 2016, 09:01:50 Last Active:    w40ut

24 November 2016, 13:26:08 Last Active:    ATeam

12 October 2017, 12:58:23 Last Active:       GoodMorningVietnam

Miscellaneous:

iTeachYouLearn account was "stolen" from @yahoo62278 in 2016 after the account was put up as collateral - however connections occurr *prior* to that date, so iTeachYouLearn is connected to the OP minime0105 via w40ut