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

[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.

[1714845996]

1714845996

[1714845996]

1714845996

[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