Ree @hacker1001101001 ICO bump account

[hacker1001101001]

You're literally quoting my reply from a thread in which I was, you've guessed it, right all along.

You know what I am talking about just don't let it slip from your hand this time.

I have no idea. Quoted for reference. Do go on please now that we've started this.

Don't have solid proofs so can't go on (could have in future). I don't prefer half baked accusations.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Going to remove my counter feedback now, as Lauda has changed the neg to something that is appropriate to leave a neg for. 

I don't have a problem with DT members negging people for ICO bumping and all that kind of stuff, just not for a disagreement and certainly not for giving merits to TECSHARE.

[marlboroza]

@hacker stop deflecting this thread, if you want to talk about lauda or anything other than this, create thread about lauda or other things.

Ok, yes they were targeted reviews

So fake ICO reviews  

IIRC it was KEPLER, as I said I even use to follow those projects I was posting in.

As I can see it is 10 posts per week requirement, and yet you said this:

OK, I agree it looks like bumping but I had no incentive from that posts more than increasing my weekly post counts back then.

And only after involvement in or with ICO bumping group was pointed, you said something different.

Funny to put up names for you right. God Bless that guy with a nice life, he left the forum due to the same torcher.

Guy tried to escrow $100-200K having long ponzi history repeating "it didn't happened on this forum" and "it happened "long time ago"" and there was some alt account thing going on around him and his family which is/was also involved in some financial pyramid scam activities on youtube so why the hell it is torcher? Besides, you just don't leave place which brings food to your table Funny that you mentioned it  

I see a string of accusations and digging up of my past incidences to tear apart my repo in any way possible.

Don't you think you are being a little narcissistic (hmmm...) here? What reputation are you talking about?

[TECSHARE]

Going to remove my counter feedback now, as Lauda has changed the neg to something that is appropriate to leave a neg for. 

I don't have a problem with DT members negging people for ICO bumping and all that kind of stuff, just not for a disagreement and certainly not for giving merits to TECSHARE.

Yes, lets just pretend this isn't about using the trust system as a tool of retribution and selective enforcement. You know what Stalin always said, find me the man I will show you the crime. What is important is they pretend it is a valid rating even under the flimsiest of pretenses and in spite of a very clear pattern of using the trust system as a tool of retribution to silence opposing opinions.

[hacker1001101001]

@hacker stop deflecting this thread, if you want to talk about lauda or anything other than this, create thread about lauda or other things.

Sorry but I had to mention as the person claiming you as his alt also seems to be involved in such activities. So was just giving an hit.

As I can see it is 10 posts per week requirement, and yet you said this:

OK, I agree it looks like bumping but I had no incentive from that posts more than increasing my weekly post counts back then.

And only after involvement in or with ICO bumping group was pointed, you said something different.

Moreover, you should check the full requirement in the rules.

Minimum 10 constructive posts per week (twitter and Facebook reports doesn't count). Regular posts in the alternate cryptocurrencies section are desired.

Imagine how a newbie would see those rules, which I changed acting on later and started posting more in other sections like Speculation, Speculation (Altcoins), Altcoin Discussion, Economics and Bitcoin Discussion you can see as you have already scanned through my post history. But this was only when I get to knew slowly about the rules. I am very clear here about my intentions back then and now so that everyone could judge the change. I have agreed being naive but proved not being the same now.

Funny to put up names for you right. God Bless that guy with a nice life, he left the forum due to the same torcher.

Guy tried to escrow $100-200K having long ponzi history repeating "it didn't happened on this forum" and "it happened "long time ago"" and there was some alt account thing going on around him and his family which is/was also involved in some financial pyramid scam activities on youtube so why the hell it is torcher? Besides, you just don't leave place which brings food to your table Funny that you mentioned it  

Sorry for going off-topic but as you thought I being his alt, I would like to let know, I don't find him harmful to the community overall not now and not back then. What pulled him in a trap was just him asking if he can escorw the funds, and him running with that funds are just guess. Other things are just part of witch hunts, show me the man I will show you the crime.

I see a string of accusations and digging up of my past incidences to tear apart my repo in any way possible.

Don't you think you are being a little narcissistic (hmmm...) here? What reputation are you talking about?

Jumping from defending an abusive feedback case here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5182530.0 to again due to defending on more abusive feedback from the same incident here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5210651.0 and again defending myself from an abusive feedback from the same incident here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5213377.0 to this thread again digging up my past incidents which I have left years back. ( Don't know what to say this, as it's very high level of coincidences if one tries to look at it that way )

I act because I don't enjoy my character being discussed this way.

[PrimeNumber7]

What is the truth?

Reply <>
and so on.

How this happened?

I looked at a select number of threads in Alternate cryptocurrencies > Announcements (Altcoins) (board 159), and there is a clear pattern among the following UIDs:
1021758 (this is hacker, but the pattern is less strong)
1082347
980712
1234403
1171587
1527744

With regards to the select threads I reviewed, these accounts tend to post in the same threads, when posting small numbers of posts, they tend to post in groups of 3-5. When they post larger numbers of posts in a thread, they all tend to post in the thread, and they all have a higher number of posts in the thread. In other words, when one of them makes low double digits number of posts, they tend to make low-mid double digits numbers of posts in a thread, and when one of them makes high double digits of posts in a thread, they tend to make high double digits to low triple digits number of posts in a thread.

Some caveats -- these UIDs were not found in a larger data set, they were selected because they were mentioned in your post; the hacker account mostly makes less posts in each thread than the field; I didn't look at the content of the posts, and therefore am not accounting for things such as drama/controversy that may explain the pattern; no statistical tests were done on this data to see if this is different than a random group of accounts, part of the reason for this there is a lot of manipulation in this board and I am presently unsure how to account for the manipulation.

I have posted examples of this pattern below:
UID           Thread     Post Count
980712   2431660   35
1021758   2431660   18
1082347   2431660   60
1171587   2431660   132
1234403   2431660   129
1527744   2431660   66

980712   2612592   25
1021758   2612592   13
1082347   2612592   24
1171587   2612592   35
1234403   2612592   30
1527744   2612592   4

1021758   3289130   3
1171587   3289130   21
1234403   3289130   79
1527744   3289130   18

980712   2431660   35
1021758   2431660   18
1082347   2431660   60
1171587   2431660   132
1234403   2431660   129
1527744   2431660   66

980712   2605122   1
1082347   2605122   1
1171587   2605122   1
1234403   2605122   1

980712   2415359   4
1021758   2415359   1
1082347   2415359   8
1171587   2415359   12
1234403   2415359   4

I want to be clear that I do not wish to pass any kind of judgment on hacker.

[nutildah]

I act because I don't enjoy my character being discussed this way.

You're not the first member to be analyzed in this fashion and you certainly won't be the last. Weeks after getting on DT my reputation was thoroughly savaged. If you can't handle criticism then don't dish it out.

If you must know, I distrusted you because I don't trust reformed shitposters that suddenly decide to take an interest in forum issues. You're trying too hard.

Seems as if my instincts were correct here. You should have taken this as advice to tone it down a bit, but instead you ramped up your involvement in the drama even more. You apparently have lots of alt accounts on the forum which makes your obsession with DT (perhaps quest for eventual DT status as it would appear) even more disturbing.

I want to be clear that I do not wish to pass any kind of judgment on hacker.

That's all well and good Quickseller, and thanks for chiming in with your analysis, but could you please stop posting under both of your accounts in the same thread? Its getting rather insulting that you insist we pretend you're not Quickseller (you are -- I'd rather not open a thread in Reputation about it). If you're gonna post in a thread, stick with one account.

Kind of weird that you are using an alt to post in a thread that is largely about alt accounts.

[hacker1001101001]

I act because I don't enjoy my character being discussed this way.

You're not the first member to be analyzed in this fashion and you certainly won't be the last. Weeks after getting on DT my reputation was thoroughly savaged. If you can't handle criticism then don't dish it out.

I am pretty open to criticsm, but even after accepting my past mistakes some users put this up as an hunt as I mentioned the link's of incidences here.

Seems as if my instincts were correct here. You should have taken this as advice to tone it down a bit, but instead you ramped up your involvement in the drama even more. You apparently have lots of alt accounts on the forum which makes your obsession with DT (perhaps quest for eventual DT status as it would appear) even more disturbing.

I don't control any other account than this on the forum now, me being on an quest to DT is just your vivid dream. I was dragged into speaking about this darma due to the abuse of trust ratings on me if you see it clearly. Your advice seemed to me as keeping quiet even after looking at people getting harassed under some group thinking, which I can't resist speaking about. None of this makes me disturbing or an harm to the community.

~snip~

Really you know to many things about others alts here, what a Sherlock brain.

[TECSHARE]

I act because I don't enjoy my character being discussed this way.

You're not the first member to be analyzed in this fashion and you certainly won't be the last. Weeks after getting on DT my reputation was thoroughly savaged. If you can't handle criticism then don't dish it out.

If you must know, I distrusted you because I don't trust reformed shitposters that suddenly decide to take an interest in forum issues. You're trying too hard.

Seems as if my instincts were correct here. You should have taken this as advice to tone it down a bit, but instead you ramped up your involvement in the drama even more. You apparently have lots of alt accounts on the forum which makes your obsession with DT (perhaps quest for eventual DT status as it would appear) even more disturbing.

I want to be clear that I do not wish to pass any kind of judgment on hacker.

That's all well and good Quickseller, and thanks for chiming in with your analysis, but could you please stop posting under both of your accounts in the same thread? Its getting rather insulting that you insist we pretend you're not Quickseller (you are -- I'd rather not open a thread in Reputation about it). If you're gonna post in a thread, stick with one account.

Kind of weird that you are using an alt to post in a thread that is largely about alt accounts.

Yeah you like to analyze them real good don't ya? Get up in there deep. Funny how these deep dives always seem to happen when people speak critically of a handful of users here and all of the toadies hop out from the dark to form Doltron. This is just the usual retribution for the crime of open discussion as if the most vocal characters here aren't engaged in exactly all the things they are running around accusing these others of.

[suchmoon]

I don't control any other account than this on the forum now

Like right now, i.e. when you were typing that sentence? Until you log in to one of the other accounts? What a sleazy way to address a simple issue.

[hacker1001101001]

I don't control any other account than this on the forum now

Like right now, i.e. when you were typing that sentence? Until you log in to one of the other accounts? What a sleazy way to address a simple issue.

I mean I am not in control of any accounts accused above others than this ( not logged in from 2 years ).

[marlboroza]

~
That's why I elaborated too[...]

Sorry for going off-topic but as you thought I being his alt

It is good that we I mean I elaborated 

Other things are just part of witch hunts, show me the man I will show you the crime.

Ok, Mini Me, I've tried to verify this:

Code:

{
  "address": "0x15ba9083b4c96421827ae85d7a7d211f5862fcde",
  "msg": "Hacker1001101001 Signing in! Proof to @marlboroza.",
  "sig": "0x8308e608449df905f13bc3614e28ec4ba8a65ed9203934ce441217c04df4f1bc68be86776778b 70f3a34bb3179c75f849556a86856ca9079395a61015e6852231c",
  "version": "3",
  "signer": "MEW"
}

MEW says "invalid hex string". (can't take screenshot)
Etherscan.io showed "Result: Sorry! The Signature Message Verification Failed" (https://prnt.sc/qivokd)

I probably did something wrong 

Can you sign message with today's date? 3.1.2020.?

to tear apart the repo of another scam buster like me.

Oh, more narcissistic statements.

[dragonvslinux]

{
  "address": "0x15ba9083b4c96421827ae85d7a7d211f5862fcde",
  "msg": "Hacker1001101001 Signing in! Proof to @marlboroza.",
  "sig": "0x8308e608449df905f13bc3614e28ec4ba8a65ed9203934ce441217c04df4f1bc68be86776778b 70f3a34bb3179c75f849556a86856ca9079395a61015e6852231c",
  "version": "3",
  "signer": "MEW"
}

Verified.



MEW format:

{
"address": "0x15ba9083b4c96421827ae85d7a7d211f5862fcde",
"msg": "Hacker1001101001 Signing in! Proof to @marlboroza.",
"sig": "0x8308e608449df905f13bc3614e28ec4ba8a65ed9203934ce441217c04df4f1bc68be86776778b 70f3a34bb3179c75f849556a86856ca9079395a61015e6852231c",
"version": "3",
"signer": "MEW"
}

[nutildah]

I mean I am not in control of any accounts accused above others than this ( not logged in from 2 years ).

K, doesn't mean you don't have alts.

Yeah you like to analyze them real good don't ya? Get up in there deep. Funny how these deep dives always seem to happen when people speak critically of a handful of users here and all of the toadies hop out from the dark to form Doltron. This is just the usual retribution for the crime of open discussion as if the most vocal characters here aren't engaged in exactly all the things they are running around accusing these others of.

When I said my reputation was savaged weeks after being added to DT, I was referring to actions done by yourself and subsequently cryptohunter. You're in no position to be talking about "usual retribution" here as you tried your hardest to shit on me over an issue you supposedly don't care about, all because of some stuff happening in P&S. Don't play that tune for me, bullshit maestro.

[marlboroza]

~

Oh, yes, thanks. There was space in signature which I didn't see

0x8308e608449df905f13bc3614e28ec4ba8a65ed9203934ce441217c04df4f1bc68be86776778b 70f3a34bb3179c75f849556a86856ca9079395a61015e6852231c

[eddie13]

3) something which looks like "payed to bump ICO" : I agreed to be involved in such posting but left when I got to knew it's forbidden here.

Minimum 10 constructive posts per week (twitter and Facebook reports doesn't count). Regular posts in the alternate cryptocurrencies section are desired.

Imagine how a newbie would see those rules, which I changed acting on later and started posting more in other sections like Speculation, Speculation (Altcoins), Altcoin Discussion, Economics and Bitcoin Discussion you can see as you have already scanned through my post history. But this was only when I get to knew slowly about the rules. I am very clear here about my intentions back then and now so that everyone could judge the change. I have agreed being naive but proved not being the same now.

Were you payed specifically, unrelated to the signature campaign, to bump post specific ICOs?
Were you only posting in ICO threads to satisfy your sig campaign, or were you also being paid separately for any other specific targeted posting such as thread bumping?

[marlboroza]

There must be perfectly valid explanation why this address has ~20% transactions to and/or from this group of payed ICO bumping shills...

As explained above, I being engaged with these peoples and activity for very early times of mine on the forum and for short interval too

[...]

I have agreed my involvement years back for a very short period of time

Now hold on a second with that thought.

First transaction (From Mysterious01 to you):
732 days 8 hrs ago (Jan-01-2018 12:48:05 PM +UTC)
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2055958f76a4ac83cba148a7a9934887f199e95a1103c04cc31ef65ecbc078cc

Last transaction (From you to Mysterious01)
319 days 18 hrs ago (Feb-18-2019 02:04:10 AM +UTC)
https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb24c40b43641940656f47f790880c932f20c27c11907a88c90cfd730d4237588

That is 413 days, please elaborate "very short period of time". If I counted correctly, there are 9 transactions from you to account Mysterious01 and 56 transactions from account Mysterious01 to you. Elaborate this as well and I might consider to lock thread. (note: I didn't check most other addresses, this is specifically for 0x5aF75BF78984F3e22CFCCcB52BF62f529bCB440b (PDAngel and Mysterious1's addy) and 0x15ba9083b4c96421827ae85d7a7d211f5862fcde (hacker1001101001's addy)


I almost forgot something.

OK, I agree it looks like bumping but I had no incentive from that posts more than increasing my weekly post counts back then.

In which campaign have you been then? Weekly post count? Post it or those are just words.

IIRC it was KEPLER, as I said I even use to follow those projects I was posting in.

Kepler's signature campaign started on January 30., local rule is 10 posts per week (yes, as you said, no twitter and facebook count but you don't have any twitter/face posts as I can see) and there is this rule: "Post will be counted weekly until Tuesday 23:59 forum time."

January 30. was Wednesday so:

"first week" was between February 1. - February 7.
"second week" was between February 8. - February 14.
"third week" was between February 15. - February 21.

In that period you have posted more or less (if I counted it correctly) 44 post in altcoin [ANN] (few posts are not in [ANN] and then you stopped posting there.  That is ~14 posts a week.

Between December 31. 2017. and January 30. 2018. you posted cca 166 posts in [Ann] threads. You said several times:

I agree I use to post for some time in some ICO threads, but that was the only level on which I could produce content back then to get through the signature post requirements. [...] rather was just filling my signature campaigns post requirements.

As I said, that was the only level of contents I could produce on the forum back then to reach my atlcoin signature bountys post requirements weekly and I read the rules as post in altcoin sections as accepted which encouraged me to stumble over there.

I was not involved in any type of paid posting promotion rather was just filling my signature campaigns post requirements.

Your words, not my. Which signature campaign required from you to post ~40 posts per week? Anyway, after this post you turned your story 180 degrees:

Ok, yes they were targeted reviews

[...]

Again funny for you, I already agreed I was involved in posting for ICOs and following them even on telegram, which I left when I got to know it is forbidden on the forum.

Right...

[TECSHARE]

I mean I am not in control of any accounts accused above others than this ( not logged in from 2 years ).

K, doesn't mean you don't have alts.

Yeah you like to analyze them real good don't ya? Get up in there deep. Funny how these deep dives always seem to happen when people speak critically of a handful of users here and all of the toadies hop out from the dark to form Doltron. This is just the usual retribution for the crime of open discussion as if the most vocal characters here aren't engaged in exactly all the things they are running around accusing these others of.

When I said my reputation was savaged weeks after being added to DT, I was referring to actions done by yourself and subsequently cryptohunter. You're in no position to be talking about "usual retribution" here as you tried your hardest to shit on me over an issue you supposedly don't care about, all because of some stuff happening in P&S. Don't play that tune for me, bullshit maestro.

That wasn't retribution. Retribution for what exactly? When I am talking about retribution in this context I am talking about abusing the trust system to punish people for speaking out. All I did was talk about your history here, I never used the trust system against you. That was me using your own standards against you to show what a total hypocrite you are as you run around accusing people of shit you yourself are guilty of.

You were trying to destroy Bill Gator's rep for speaking out using the fact that he purchased the account as the sole crime he was supposedly guilty of, yet you yourself were engaged in the same activity. Yes yes, you claim you never actually sold it, but you can never prove that, and we all know how much you enjoy speculating, so lets use logical speculation to assume your account was sold too since you can't prove yourself innocent. See how much fun the guilty until proven innocent standard is?

People like you Vod, and Suchgoon keep saying this kind of shit like it is just so obvious I am abusive of the trust system you need never actually give any examples. Then when I press the issue you just again pretend it is self evident and scurry off to your clown holes, or argue over meaningless shit until the topic is sufficiently slid to another subject.

[hacker1001101001]

There must be perfectly valid explanation why this address has ~20% transactions to and/or from this group of payed ICO bumping shills...

As explained above, I being engaged with these peoples and activity for very early times of mine on the forum and for short interval too

[...]

I have agreed my involvement years back for a very short period of time

Now hold on a second with that thought.

First transaction (From Mysterious01 to you):
732 days 8 hrs ago (Jan-01-2018 12:48:05 PM +UTC)
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2055958f76a4ac83cba148a7a9934887f199e95a1103c04cc31ef65ecbc078cc

Last transaction (From you to Mysterious01)
319 days 18 hrs ago (Feb-18-2019 02:04:10 AM +UTC)
https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb24c40b43641940656f47f790880c932f20c27c11907a88c90cfd730d4237588

That is 413 days, please elaborate "very short period of time". If I counted correctly, there are 9 transactions from you to account Mysterious01 and 56 transactions from account Mysterious01 to you. Elaborate this as well and I might consider to lock thread. (note: I didn't check most other addresses, this is specifically for 0x5aF75BF78984F3e22CFCCcB52BF62f529bCB440b (PDAngel and Mysterious1's addy) and 0x15ba9083b4c96421827ae85d7a7d211f5862fcde (hacker1001101001's addy)

I knew the person who controls the address 0x5aF75BF78984F3e22CFCCcB52BF62f529bCB440b only through telegram, and never contacted or knew about his Bitcointalk accounts or never talked with him on the forum. He was the person who is the part of the process who dragged me to Bitcointalk explicitly.

As per you see some of my early transactions with him, which are linked to the bumping services and some payments related to it.

To make it more clear about the transactions related to bumping.

First transaction on Jan-01-2018 https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2055958f76a4ac83cba148a7a9934887f199e95a1103c04cc31ef65ecbc078cc

Last transaction on Aug-29-2018 https://etherscan.io/tx/0x2fdf948f12d619d0d9139d716f9ef567e173ba64fa4bfc5364b81f4b39915cb5

after this exact date, there was no connection of me with ICO bumping related work ( you can tally it with my post history ) all the rest transactions with the address 0x5aF75BF78984F3e22CFCCcB52BF62f529bCB440b after Aug-29-2018 is related to other payments of some camping management on which I use to work with them as back end. ( I can't disclose the campaigns for privacy purpose of the same person ). I even did some deals about smart contracts with them to send multiple transactions at a time. None of this was related to bumping as I was aware of the risks involved a bit late.

My last transaction with that person was around a year ago on Feb-18-2019 https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb24c40b43641940656f47f790880c932f20c27c11907a88c90cfd730d4237588, worth 1.4 ETH for same campaign management work I mentioned above. I have not been in contact with him later, as per I know he has started his local business and is away from crypto as per I know. ( not from my country ).

Your words, not my. Which signature campaign required from you to post ~40 posts per week? Anyway, after this post you turned your story 180 degrees:

Ok, yes they were targeted reviews

[...]

Again funny for you, I already agreed I was involved in posting for ICOs and following them even on telegram, which I left when I got to know it is forbidden on the forum.

Right...

I said that as I was posting mostly for signature campaigns as that was really my goal than bumping the ICO threads, and the same was the requirements of the campaign about posting in ANN section only, so I did both at the same time. As some of the campaigns like TRF (one of my earliest one) were very profitable to me than collecting these pumping ETH payments. ( An interesting thing I got around 0.3 BTC back then just from TRF signature campaign for around 4 weeks of posting, interesting right?).

I am not turning the story but rather willing to agree on my mistakes back then. Yes, I have left it and would never do it again.

Were you payed specifically, unrelated to the signature campaign, to bump post specific ICOs?
Were you only posting in ICO threads to satisfy your sig campaign, or were you also being paid separately for any other specific targeted posting such as thread bumping?

I agreed being paid, please read the above info.

[marlboroza]

is related to other payments of some camping management on which I use to work with them as back end. ( I can't disclose the campaigns for privacy purpose of the same person ). I even did some deals about smart contracts with them to send multiple transactions at a time. None of this was related to bumping as I was aware of the risks involved a bit late.

Well, this will definitely raise more questions.

You could have said few day ago "I was paid to bump ico threads", but ok, you choose different path. Anyway, I said I will lock thread so locking it for now.