Quickseller's off topic ramblings from Chipmixer thread

[suchmoon]

Trying to redirect this from the campaign thread that's being derailed by Quickseller.

Similarly, suchmoon is using publicly available information to reduce the privacy of forum users. She is not providing any kind of publicly facing service with the information she collects.

You literally linked to the public service I'm providing - signature campaign stats. You've been butthurt for months about my plagiarism search, another public service I'm providing. You're just making up ridiculous criteria (publicly facing service) as if that means anything. How the fuck would a publicly "facing" service alleviate your privacy concern-trolling? You'd be yelling like mad if I made scraped data available on some website.

It would not be unreasonable to ask what she is doing with this information, but that is another discussion.

Except you don't ask nor do you listen, you just keep making shit up.

Paying suchmoon to advertise for ChipMixer is akin to ChipMixer sponsoring Chainalysis.

I believe that ChipMixer paying suchmoon to advertise their services is enough to question just how much ChipMixer is committed to ensuring the privacy of their users.

Is that what this is? Trying to get me fired?

You're promoting a mixer too. How does that align with your repeated attempts to invade my privacy by doxing me?

I'll agree, that's probably suchmoon's motivation; she's a staunch fighter of plagiarism and those who abuse alt accounts.  But is that QS's gripe with her efforts?  Is it such a bad thing for suchmoon to focus her attention?  How does that affect our privacy?

Based on Quickseller's earlier fantasies about me being somehow linked with tspacepilot and about NLP being "junk science" I think it's quite obvious where this is going. Trying to have me discredited before shit hits the fan. Quicksy, let me put your mind at ease here. I did run perplexity checks on all your known and suspected alts. There are no surprises there. I will continue to do this as I please because it's important for me to know when I'm dealing with scammers, and I will continue to warn others when I think I have a reason to. I may make a "publicly facing service" available for that at some point, thanks for asking.

[1713608098]

1713608098

[1713608098]

1713608098

[1713608098]

1713608098

[1713608098]

1713608098

[1713608098]

1713608098

[Timelord2o67]

LoyceV's website contains certain information that can only be seen ordinary after logging into BitCiinTalk (flags info as just one example) so there will always be a certain amount of leaching of information.

[suchmoon]

LoyceV's website contains certain information that can only be seen ordinary after logging into BitCiinTalk (flags info as just one example) so there will always be a certain amount of leaching of information.

LoyceV excludes certain folders from ending up on google:

http://loyce.club/robots.txt

User-agent: *
Disallow: /archive/
Disallow: /sigcamp/

But not trust information. Not sure if that's a mistake or by design.

[LoyceMobile]

But not trust information. Not sure if that's a mistake or by design.

I didn't really consider it before Timelord's post. Is it bad that Trust scores and Flag votes can be seen without making an account? It's not as if it's difficult to create an account, and I doubt anyone would choose my site instead of just creating an account if they're after Trust data.
Theymos' data dumps are available without logging in.

LoyceV: add "active" to the robots exclusion list!

[suchmoon]

But not trust information. Not sure if that's a mistake or by design.

I didn't really consider it before Timelord's post. Is it bad that Trust scores and Flag votes can be seen without making an account? It's not as if it's difficult to create an account, and I doubt anyone would choose my site instead of just creating an account if they're after Trust data.
Theymos' data dumps are available without logging in.

LoyceV: add "active" to the robots exclusion list!

I don't know if it's bad, just an observation. If anyone is really concerned (and not just concern-trolling like Quicksy) about privacy then I'd think trust lists and possibly ratings and flags would be more of an issue than posts, most of which are already indexed by Google anyway.

I didn't know dumps are available without logging in. I thought I had to log in to get the merit file but maybe I'm mistaken (too lazy to check now).

[LoyceV]

LoyceV: add "active" to the robots exclusion list!

On second thought: Active doesn't have full posts, so there's no need to hide it from Google.

I didn't know dumps are available without logging in.

I've been downloading those long before I knew how to feed browser cookies to my scraper.

[Timelord2o67]

I can only echo suchmoon's comment:

I don't know if it's bad, just an observation.

There's no real way to discern who is scraping data or what they are using it for.

[eddie13]

If you are concerned about privacy why aren't you complaining about LoyceV's trust setting viewer

I think it is a flaw that theymos made our DT1 voting public..
It seems pretty strange to me that it is not anonymous because anonymous voting it is a staple of free democracy across the world..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_ballot
"The Secret Ballot, also known as Australian ballot,[1] is a voting method in which a voter's choices in an election or a referendum are anonymous, forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation, blackmailing, and potential vote buying. "

"In the United States, most states had moved to secret ballots soon after the presidential election of 1884. Kentucky was the last state to do so in 1891"

"Article 21.3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, "The will of the people...shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which...shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.""


But, since it has been made public information I do not fault LoyceV for collecting and organizing it.. Fair game..

I think their would have been and still be a lot less drama and less corruption if it was anonymous though..
I think DT1 voting should be disconnected from trust list settings and anonymized, but as long as it is public information analysis is just going to happen..

[arbiter5]

Seriously though. If you don't want certain information to be publicly available, then don't use that service in the first place. It's not like suchmoon and the others are breaching Bitcointalk's database to obtain these data.

The information is publicly available to start with, and statistics are just being provided. This complaint makes zero sense.

[LoyceV]

I think it is a flaw that theymos made our DT1 voting public..
~
I think their would have been and still be a lot less drama and less corruption if it was anonymous though..
I think DT1 voting should be disconnected from trust list settings and anonymized, but as long as it is public information analysis is just going to happen..

I think you make a good point, and this probably deserves a topic in Meta.
But I don't think this can easily be implemented: DT1-votes are part of the normal Trust list, and because adding someone to your Trust list has large recursive implications, it's necessary to be able to view who's judgement they Trust (and who's judgement they Trust!) to decide whether or not you trust their judgement.

[TMAN]

Is that what this is? Trying to get me fired?

OG tried to do the same to me on a few occasions and failed each time.

[alani123]

I'd rather avoid naming names but I don't think animosity is useful to anyone... The forum's web of trust and merit system appear to be points of conflict for some of the top accounts, which I can't help but state that it makes me sad. I've seen top figures be caught up in drama for no good reason here over the years. It's obvious many of these people have the capabilities to be really creative, teach the world or in general leave something positive behind in some way or capacity. LoyceV is in my view spending a lot of his time to utilize his knowledge and resources building tools useful to forum users, something which I find very admirable. I wish more users of this forum would follow that principle and use their energy to be helpful instead of being ready to take any offense and stir up drama at all times.

IMO it'd be better if this community paid little to no attention to drama, and instead looked down upon immature behaviors. I'm tired of 'drama-lama' threads pilling up pages upon pages of responses, especially if it concerns old-time members.