PrimeNumber7 is an alt of Quickseller, Take 2

[TECSHARE]

So much for giving Quickseller a break. This is why you never bend the knee to tyrants. They never stop until you destroy them.

So you are saying that primenumber7 and quickseller are alt accounts?

If you read my post again, you will see that my question is directed to PM7, not quickseller, but thanks for your criticism anyway  

this is the second time you are unearthing posts of mine (going back to 2015!) in a pathetic attempt to malign and discredit me.

Ok, I'll bite. I don't remember "unearthing posts of yours from 2015." if you can remind me and how is it related to this thread?
Why are you two now trying to hide my question?

It doesn't matter. You think he is. You are pathetic little people who need to push everyone else around to feel better about yourselves.

[figmentofmyass]

Ok, I'll bite. I don't remember "unearthing posts of yours from 2015." if you can remind me and how is it related to this thread?

i suspect you unearthed this post while investigating my account, particularly because you posted it long after the discussion was over. it's curious why you felt the need to include my nested quote ITT when it was 100% irrelevant to the point you were making. it's almost as if you wanted to imply some connection between quickseller and i:

there is no going back. the loan was defaulted on, the collateral was liquidated, and there can be no repayment of the original loan.

There have been multiple examples in the past in which negative trust was removed after no-collateral loans have been repaid, and when stolen money has been returned to it's rightful owner. Often times a neutral rating replaces such negative rating, however this is nowhere nearly as detrimental as a negative rating.

I don't understand the logic that someone who has caused no monitory loss should be labeled a scammer when someone who took money and later returned it late is not.

my suspicion is based on the fact that you regularly engage in this behavior, and also because you specifically targeted me here. however, since i can't substantiate that suspicion, i won't push the issue further.

the Astargath example alone should suffice to show you are being petty and vindictive towards me. remember, only one of us is digging through the others' post history to try and publicly malign him. i believe the way you misconstrued an "innocent joke" for "dishonesty" suffices to show deceitful behavior on your part too.

I know you didn't, you tried to make fun of something, that's why I mentioned it.

how does your premise---"figmentofmyass made a joke 2 years ago"---establish your conclusion that "whatever [figmentofmyass] said in this thread...the truth is extremely likely opposite"?

the claim is so fucking absurd that it really casts doubt on your motives.

are you two now trying to hide my question?

um, i directly responded to you and quoted that post. that's the opposite of hiding anything.

[marlboroza]

particularly because you posted it long after the discussion was over.

According to who? You?

i suspect you unearthed this post while investigating my account

WTF? No one is investigating your account, stop being such paranoid prick.

it's almost as if you wanted to imply some connection between quickseller and i:

Cherrypicking quotes? How the hell is pointing that account posted "monitory" and quoting it together with nutildah's finding and TECSHARE's tagging (sorry, neutral rating) == implying that you are quickseller?

You are not making any sense.

the Astargath example alone should suffice to show you are being petty and vindictive towards me. remember, only one of us is digging through the others' post history to try and publicly malign him. i believe the way you misconstrued an "innocent joke" for "dishonesty" suffices to show deceitful behavior on your part too.

Not really, I pointed your mocking, your flawed judgement in case of fake coin and your response in this thread.

are you two now trying to hide my question?

um, i directly responded to you and quoted that post. that's the opposite of hiding anything.

Quoting half of my post leaving out PM7 - QS parts, talking about random things IS trying to bury question:

@PM7, please explain how you and quickseller used exactly the same words to report posts?

Anything else?

[figmentofmyass]

WTF? No one is investigating your account, stop being such paranoid prick.

lol, says the guy who literally just pulled up years-old posts of mine in a specific effort to publicly discredit me. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219253.msg53853002#msg53853002

why are you using my posts from 2018 as the basis to publicly attack me? perhaps you could answer that before calling me paranoid.

the Astargath example alone should suffice to show you are being petty and vindictive towards me. remember, only one of us is digging through the others' post history to try and publicly malign him. i believe the way you misconstrued an "innocent joke" for "dishonesty" suffices to show deceitful behavior on your part too.

Not really, I pointed your mocking, your flawed judgement in case of fake coin and your response in this thread.

and what have you proven? absolutely nothing, except that you are extremely petty and vindictive. you publicly attack people who disagree with you, and you do so with extremely weak arguments.

i suggest you pick on someone else who can't shit on every fucking argument you make.

and sorry, but you haven't begun to prove anything about "flawed judgment". it's cute how you threw that in there though.

are you two now trying to hide my question?

um, i directly responded to you and quoted that post. that's the opposite of hiding anything.

Quoting half of my post leaving out PM7 - QS parts, talking about random things IS trying to bury question

wtf? you leveled public accusations at me! how is responding to them "random"?

this is yet another dishonest insinuation on your part.

[nutildah]

So much for giving Quickseller a break. This is why you never bend the knee to tyrants. They never stop until you destroy them.

So you are saying that primenumber7 and quickseller are alt accounts?

If you read my post again, you will see that my question is directed to PM7, not quickseller, but thanks for your criticism anyway  

HAHAHA... That is effin' hilarious. What's even funnier is that TS is so indignant and afraid of appearing wrong that he will now never remove PrimeNumber7 from his trust inclusions, even though he still has Quickseller distrusted.

[TECSHARE]

So much for giving Quickseller a break. This is why you never bend the knee to tyrants. They never stop until you destroy them.

So you are saying that primenumber7 and quickseller are alt accounts?

If you read my post again, you will see that my question is directed to PM7, not quickseller, but thanks for your criticism anyway  

HAHAHA... That is effin' hilarious. What's even funnier is that TS is so indignant and afraid of appearing wrong that he will now never remove PrimeNumber7 from his trust inclusions, even though he still has Quickseller distrusted.

[img  width=300]https://i.imgur.com/4Hxhdon.png[/img]

You are wrong, and you will never admit it. I can prove it.

[nutildah]

So much for giving Quickseller a break. This is why you never bend the knee to tyrants. They never stop until you destroy them.

So you are saying that primenumber7 and quickseller are alt accounts?

If you read my post again, you will see that my question is directed to PM7, not quickseller, but thanks for your criticism anyway  

HAHAHA... That is effin' hilarious. What's even funnier is that TS is so indignant and afraid of appearing wrong that he will now never remove PrimeNumber7 from his trust inclusions, even though he still has Quickseller distrusted.

[img width=300]https://i.imgur.com/4Hxhdon.png[/img]

You are wrong, and you will never admit it. I can prove it.

Oh, you are removing him then? OK, well, I stand corrected.

[TECSHARE]

You are wrong, and you will never admit it. I can prove it.

Oh, you are removing him then? OK, well, I stand corrected.

He was gone from my list before you even made your shitflinging post about it. Now, here is where you admit you were wrong. You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

[Vod]

OK, well, I stand corrected.

Nice of you to admit you were wrong, even if your opponent doesn't have the ability to recognize it.  

Techy says he has proof you will never do this.   Do you think he will apologize now, or provide the proof?  lol

[TECSHARE]

OK, well, I stand corrected.

Nice of you to admit you were wrong, even if your opponent doesn't have the ability to recognize it.  

I have the ability to recognize a disingenuous snide remark intended as bait, not as an admission of being wrong. Speaking of being wrong, don't you have some more people to accuse of pedophilia or some abusive trust ratings to hand out Vod?

[Vod]

I have the ability to recognize a disingenuous snide remark intended as bait, not as an admission of being wrong.

Do you have the ability to admit when you were wrong?  Your opponent did...

[nutildah]

You are wrong, and you will never admit it. I can prove it.

Oh, you are removing him then? OK, well, I stand corrected.

He was gone from my list before you even made your shitflinging post about it. Now, here is where you admit you were wrong. You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

Good for you for coming around. You must have made the change in the last 30 hours or so, but still, I'm genuinely surprised and somewhat glad.

[TECSHARE]

Good for you for coming around. You must have made the change in the last 30 hours or so, but still, I'm genuinely surprised and somewhat glad.

You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

[nutildah]

Good for you for coming around. You must have made the change in the last 30 hours or so, but still, I'm genuinely surprised and somewhat glad.

You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

If you really did remove PrimeNumber7 from your trust inclusions, then yes, as I said a couple hours ago, I was wrong.

In this instance I'm happy to be wrong as it means you are finally coming to your senses.

I'd be thrilled if figmentofmyass could also weigh in with his opinion on the issue, I asked him 3 weeks ago and he never responded:

Back to the topic at hand: do you personally believe PN7 is an alt of Quickseller, or not?

I'd be appreciative if you could just answer the question without engaging in some sort of deflection or castigation.

He seems to be the one person here still not sold on the idea.

[TECSHARE]

Good for you for coming around. You must have made the change in the last 30 hours or so, but still, I'm genuinely surprised and somewhat glad.

You were wrong weren't you Nutilduhhh?

If you really did remove PrimeNumber7 from your trust inclusions, then yes, as I said a couple hours ago, I was wrong.

In this instance I'm happy to be wrong as it means you are finally coming to your senses.

I'd be thrilled if figmentofmyass could also weigh in with his opinion on the issue, I asked him 3 weeks ago and he never responded:

Back to the topic at hand: do you personally believe PN7 is an alt of Quickseller, or not?

I'd be appreciative if you could just answer the question without engaging in some sort of deflection or castigation.

He seems to be the one person here still not sold on the idea.

Great. Time to get to work digging up more stuff to make baseless accusations over. I know you don't bother checking to see if you accusations are supported before making them, but that is usually a critical part of making them. Maybe next time check first before you desperately grasp at anything to attack me over.

[Vod]

He seems to be the one person here still not sold on the idea.

Keep in mind, while you, I, OG, etc, do business here on the forum and will be accountable for what we write, Techy is just a troll and no vested interest here other than to disrupt it.     He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

[TECSHARE]

He seems to be the one person here still not sold on the idea.

Keep in mind, while you, I, OG, etc, do business here on the forum and will be accountable for what we write, Techy is just a troll and no vested interest here other than to disrupt it.     He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

You said you provided substantiation for your ratings against me. Please do quote. That shouldn't be too hard right? It is not like you are just claiming to have done so to avoid having to support your claims that wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny now is it?

[Vod]

Keep in mind, while you, I, OG, etc, do business here on the forum and will be accountable for what we write, Techy is just a troll and no vested interest here other than to disrupt it.    He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

You said you provided substantiation for your ratings against me. Please do quote. That shouldn't be too hard right? It is not like you are just claiming to have done so to avoid having to support your claims that wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny now is it?

[TECSHARE]

Keep in mind, while you, I, OG, etc, do business here on the forum and will be accountable for what we write, Techy is just a troll and no vested interest here other than to disrupt it.    He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

You said you provided substantiation for your ratings against me. Please do quote. That shouldn't be too hard right? It is not like you are just claiming to have done so to avoid having to support your claims that wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny now is it?

Surprise. As you do every time I ask you to substantiate your ratings you just pretend like you have already done it. You know very well your accusations wouldn't withstand even the slightest scrutiny, so you will avoid having a critical discussion about them at all costs.

[Vod]

He's asked me for the same proof over a dozen times - the first few I provided it, but now I don't care if he is the only person who can't understand.

I cannot make the reference link any easier to click on.  :/