Is the whole trust system a joke? LAUDA OWNS IT?

[TECSHARE]

By the way I was looking around and found this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2073579.msg20717506#msg20717506

such great thoughts about those reputed coins shows how arrogant and negative minded Lauda is
quote below

DASH

Instamined scam.

ETC

Original Ethereum.

ETHEREUM

Centralized bailout scam.

LTC

Silver to Bitcoin.

XRP

That's not even a cryptocurrency.

Have u heard about Recoin? i purchased 700$ but planning to do more. what do u think about investment like this?

You are an idiot. Stop investing in shit that nobody uses/wants/needs.

Calling someone idiot just because he invests in altcoins while if someone calls Lauda idiot I am sure Lauda and his army will red paint him to an extent that his account will look like a joke.

You don't think so, let me call it, Lauda you are an idiot and a piece of shit

Lauda is a confirmed scammer. He was originally called lauda

You see he is calling dash an instamined scam above. Well you found gold there. That project was originally called xcoin then darkcoin. A scam hunting legend cryptohunter busted him for lying and pushing that same scam when he owned bags of it. For a very long time lauda was pushing that scam and lying to defend it.

LaudaM for months lies claiming he was on the xcoin/dash launch and said he was present and confimes there was no unfair start no premine/ instamine. He was pushing that scam for ages until he unloaded his bags.

Years later when lauda called cryptohunter a liar and would not present evidence crypto Hunter encouraged others to investigate laudas history and specifically his dash pushing and defending.

Find the lauda section and trace it back to his lies he was on dash launch and no premine instamine ...

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

Closure or loss of some earnings...hmmmm. No big exchanges will risk it if they try and ban it. It won't have this much volume after the pump is done.

Don't be such an obvious pumper, at least pretend to consider some possible negatives. The fact you believe there was no instamine is the best part.

I'd rather be closed than submit to the foul government. There is no pump going on. We have just started to get the attention of some media, wait for the full impact. There was no instamine, I was there.

Lauda gave him red trust for whistle blowing on him, this was backed by him auction scamming friend tman and other complicit scum like yogg and owlcatz.

Theymos is not any better he backs these proven scammers and lists then accuses whistleblowers of being the bad guys.

All the other DT members are scared or complicit. Happy so long as they get to spam chipmixer and other scampaigns.

I don't trust any of these DT or even Theymos now that removed laudas exclusion. All either scammers or complicit with them. Theymos has clear and undeniable evidence of laudas scamming and using tags to silence those that present the truth about him and he still will not blacklist him. This looks very dubious after all of this time. I mean when the warden of this forum suddenly creates a method to reintroduce a bunch of proven scammers previously kicked out of DT and painted red back in to DT glowing green and fully entrenched. Then says proven scamming, extortion, shady escrowing and using the trust system to red tag whistle blowers is just sub optimal. Then you start till wonder what is going on behind the scenes.

The proof is right there in your post. He is a liar and scammer. Lauda and DT are rotten. The evidence against lauda is concrete, same for DT they are complicit. The evidence against Theymos continues to build and is heading into a very negative direction. There is no conceivable reason why Theymos would remove the lauda exclude or not ban that filthy piece of scamming dirt.

Fortunejack and chipmixer sponsor the most shady people on this forum. Theymos has developed the most shady looking governance system possible. It removes all accountability and rewards and entrenched abuse and manipulation, while as you clearly note crushes free speech. You speak up you get a red tag and merit starvation.

What a terrible environment Theymos has created so far.


Join the guild started by Tecshare on meta board. The lists are guides but over time The guild will have The mass of numbers to cause the scamming and complicit DT abusers a lot of problems.

Interesting. That puts a lot of the current happenings into perspective.

[1713953892]

1713953892

[1713953892]

1713953892

[1713953892]

1713953892

[1713953892]

1713953892

[savetheFORUM]

I am really upset and saddened to see that no one is talking why FJ requires Id proof later only when player wins big earlier they don't need it, please read this post for once- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5229746.msg53947114#msg53947114

Also, it is a known fact that almost all casino sites reserve the right to ask for KYC under suspicious conditions which is a rule hidden in their T&C which is why I am not completely convinced that they are at fault here. You need to prove your legitimacy op.

Just because something is "legal" does not mean it is moral.

I think it's quite devious to hide under the whole "it's in our ToS" argument, especially when you have things like maximum bet amounts for bonuses (when fucking people over wasn't good enough) and these arbitrary KYC clauses.

Here's something interesting: if FortuneJack wanted to prevent money laundering (the "intention" of KYC terms) then why wouldn't they ask for KYC prior to a deposit as opposed to afterwards? You have two outcomes:

Outcome 1: The gambler loses all their funds. At this point, FJ doesn't give a shit if it's laundered or not.
Outcome 2: The gambler doesn't lose all their funds. Perhaps they win some. FJ suddenly cares if it's laundered or not.

It's dishonest behavior.

I don't know what you are talking about but surely I don't know him/her and even if I was one of the tagged accounts does that stops me from putting a genuine point? Why FJ requires ID proof only after someone wins big and how can lauda negative feedback someone just because they have different opinion?

Definitely.  I'm just hoping OP isn't an alt of cryptohunter/TOAA, because in that case it would be hard for me to take any of this seriously.  The writing style and length are similar, but I can't be sure.  OP seems a bit more level-headed than CH.

[Vod]

Mods, can you start deleting posts by the lazy users who don't bother to edit walls of text before they add one line of new useless content?  :/

[truth or dare]

I have opposed Lauda, yes. There are a number of cases in which I've literally countered a rating from Lauda. Other forum members of which I've directly opposed include Vod, OgNasty, TECSHARE, etc... the list goes on.

Same here (though not Vod so much), and although I wish we were all on the same page about everything, we all know that is never going to happen.  The conflict is what keeps the forum balanced--if you can believe that--because if all the "powerful" personalities here had the same opinions, bitcointalk would be like an oligarchy or some such thing.  There needs to be dissent, and I don't think OP should have to fear getting tagged because he's speaking out against Lauda or anyone else.  I think a lot of us agree that this wouldn't be an appropriate use of the trust system, and hopefully a tag like that would be countered.

Newbie accounts that appear to know a lot about the forum and have a grudge against DT usually means they are a sockpuppet of a tagged older account.

Definitely.  I'm just hoping OP isn't an alt of cryptohunter/TOAA, because in that case it would be hard for me to take any of this seriously.  The writing style and length are similar, but I can't be sure.  OP seems a bit more level-headed than CH.

Do you mean the same CH that had to break down simple concepts to child's examples for you to understand what a scam was before you cointunued to support it ? I have been browsing your history HugeBlackWoman and for it amusing and pathetic.  


Don't worry about this chump he will support lauda even if he suspects lauda is doing shady shit. he has confessed this before.

This member is a fool and untrustworthy.

Lauda has a special sponsorship deal with FJ he does not go through hhampuz.

Some say he is a part of FJ.

Yes it looks scammy, they know people using that low level place are not likely wanting to give ID.

you get a big win and they flag you for ID hoping you'll leave it there for them.

Avoid it and anything the scammer lauda promotes or offers.


You yourself although you are unaware have supplied evidence that confirms lauda is a lying scammer.

[Lauda]

Lauda has a special sponsorship deal with FJ he does not go through hhampuz.

Some say he is a part of FJ.

Some say that I am the CEO of FJ. Others say that I live on the Mars. Without proof, any statements without evidence in any cases would amount to defamation and you know how that is handled. 

[marlboroza]

By the way I was looking around and found this - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2073579.msg20717506#msg20717506

such great thoughts about those reputed coins shows how arrogant and negative minded Lauda is
quote below

Have u heard about Recoin? i purchased 700$ but planning to do more. what do u think about investment like this?

You are an idiot. Stop investing in shit that nobody uses/wants/needs.

Calling someone idiot just because he invests in altcoins while if someone calls Lauda idiot I am sure Lauda and his army will red paint him to an extent that his account will look like a joke.

This recoin https://www.livebitcoinnews.com/recoin-ico-scammer-pleads-guilty-in-court/ ? Trying to prove Lauda is wrong and negative you proved Lauda was right?

Read.

These trolls read what they want to read, they see word "idiot" and they see lauda posted it and then they take everything out of context.

[truth or dare]

Lauda has a special sponsorship deal with FJ he does not go through hhampuz.

Some say he is a part of FJ.

Some say that I am the CEO of FJ. Others say that I live on the Mars. Without proof, any statements without evidence in any cases would amount to defamation and you know how that is handled. 

Is that a scammer I hear trying to sound tough?
Imagine a scammer crying about being defamed as FJ CEO haha.

Is it handled by you scamming them or extorting them or you escrowing for them?

The evidence of your lying and scamming is concrete and irrefutable. Any DT not tagging and flagging you is complicit. Same goes for Theymos there evidence of you trying to dupe and scam investors is here on this thread. If he does not tag you and exclude you he is complicit with Your scamming actions.

I would not forgive or forget such scamming and lying to dupe investors. Then again with the extortion, shady escrow and trust abuse. Time to put out the trash.

[actmyname]

I believe it is important to distinguish oneself from a typical rabblerouser in the Reputation section if you truly do wish to persuade others.

One vital step is the immediate disengagement from all ad hominem remarks. Countless times have I explained to various users: as opposed to strengthening your argument by way of character assassination, one may find that the true character assassination is of their own argument.

Regardless of the validity of your statements, by planting the seed of contempt you are creating a structure of thoughts that is easier to attack. By using a weak argument, you too weaken your character. It calls to question one's character if they have to resort to underhanded tactics in order to "win" an argument.Let us impart an example to further elaborate this duality.

A supposedly-cunning serial killer has entered your house, killed your wife, and let you witness the entire event, allowing for your infuriation to blossom. Fortunately, their fingerprints are on the knife they foolishly left behind.

As opposed to solely providing the evidence, you begin to make remarks that appear to be unfounded: "He thinks he's smart but he's a total idiot, this ugly fuckface is clearly a killer."

As the serial killer walks in, you immediately start lashing out at him, spewing threats and instilling the halo effect upon his other characteristics.

Do these remarks help, or is it a mere mental masturbation of ego stroking?

[truth or dare]

I believe it is important to distinguish oneself from a typical rabblerouser in the Reputation section if you truly do wish to persuade others.

One vital step is the immediate disengagement from all ad hominem remarks. Countless times have I explained to various users: as opposed to strengthening your argument by way of character assassination, one may find that the true character assassination is of their own argument.

Regardless of the validity of your statements, by planting the seed of contempt you are creating a structure of thoughts that is easier to attack. By using a weak argument, you too weaken your character. It calls to question one's character if they have to resort to underhanded tactics in order to "win" an argument.Let us impart an example to further elaborate this duality.

A supposedly-cunning serial killer has entered your house, killed your wife, and let you witness the entire event, allowing for your infuriation to blossom. Fortunately, their fingerprints are on the knife they foolishly left behind.

As opposed to solely providing the evidence, you begin to make remarks that appear to be unfounded: "He thinks he's smart but he's a total idiot, this ugly fuckface is clearly a killer."

As the serial killer walks in, you immediately start lashing out at him, spewing threats and instilling the halo effect upon his other characteristics.

Do these remarks help, or is it a mere mental masturbation of ego stroking?

All very true but is pretty much irrelevant when the case is so clear cut.

Not sure why you don't just do the right thing and red tag lauda then open a flag on the scamming piece of dirt.

This is not just leaving finger prints. This is video footage and thousands of eye witnesses and the cops have a time machine to revisit and watch live if they want. With the killer bursting in boasting about it and saying you're next.

Fuck lauda a clear undeniably crooked scammer. No need to be polite about those that are undeniably shit stains.

Say what you like about him, it will not change the undeniable and independently verifiable evidence that demonstrates he is a scammer and is supported by many in DT.

There is no weak argument here regarding lauda being a scammer or trust abuser.

[actmyname]

All very true but is pretty much irrelevant when the case is so clear cut.

Not sure why you don't just do the right thing and red tag lauda then open a flag on the scamming piece of dirt.

This is not just leaving finger prints. This is video footage and thousands of eye witnesses and the cops have a time machine to revisit and watch live if they want. With the killer bursting in boasting about it and saying you're next.

Fuck lauda a clear undeniably crooked scammer. No need to be polite about those that are undeniably shit stains.

Say what you like about him, it will not change the undeniable and independently verifiable evidence that demonstrates he is a scammer and is supported by many in DT.

There is no weak argument here regarding lauda being a scammer or trust abuser.

I want to show you what I see every time someone writes one of these posts. Let us perform a direct substitution on the word 'Lauda' and see the concreteness of your response which I still find is plagued with antagonistic remarks.I'm not sure why you don't just do the right thing and put negative feedback on satoshi. You need to open a flag on this scamming piece of dirt.

There's tons of evidence.

Fuck satoshi, they're clearly undeniably crooked and they're a blatant scammer. This is why I call them undeniably crooked and a blatant scammer because they don't deserve politeness.

It doesn't matter what you say about him, because the evidence clearly shows he's a scammer.

There are no weak arguments in relation to satoshi being a scammer.In all of that, what do we see? Well, for one, nothing really backing up your whole schtick of "Lauda = Scammer".

If you have time to insult them over several lines in the post, then you should have time to provide a link to the evidence your whole post is based on.

[truth or dare]

All very true but is pretty much irrelevant when the case is so clear cut.

Not sure why you don't just do the right thing and red tag lauda then open a flag on the scamming piece of dirt.

This is not just leaving finger prints. This is video footage and thousands of eye witnesses and the cops have a time machine to revisit and watch live if they want. With the killer bursting in boasting about it and saying you're next.

Fuck lauda a clear undeniably crooked scammer. No need to be polite about those that are undeniably shit stains.

Say what you like about him, it will not change the undeniable and independently verifiable evidence that demonstrates he is a scammer and is supported by many in DT.

There is no weak argument here regarding lauda being a scammer or trust abuser.

I want to show you what I see every time someone writes one of these posts. Let us perform a direct substitution on the word 'Lauda' and see the concreteness of your response which I still find is plagued with antagonistic remarks.I'm not sure why you don't just do the right thing and put negative feedback on satoshi. You need to open a flag on this scamming piece of dirt.

There's tons of evidence.

Fuck satoshi, they're clearly undeniably crooked and they're a blatant scammer. This is why I call them undeniably crooked and a blatant scammer because they don't deserve politeness.

It doesn't matter what you say about him, because the evidence clearly shows he's a scammer.

There are no weak arguments in relation to satoshi being a scammer.In all of that, what do we see? Well, for one, nothing really backing up your whole schtick of "Lauda = Scammer".

If you have time to insult them over several lines in the post, then you should have time to provide a link to the evidence your whole post is based on.

That is brilliant. Do you always ignore the content of the thread that you post in?

Have a look starting with my first post in this thread.

I think your substitution with satoshi may run into some problems ....like for instance the concrete evidence is independently verifiable as coming from lauda not satoshi


like the police saying look if we edit the video footage to Santa killing your wife, pretend the 1000's f eye witnesses are saying it was santa, put Santa's finger prints on the knife,  then all of us cops pretend we see Santa there now threatening to kill you next ...then you see how silly you sound claiming it was real murderer?

This is such a insane example. Please be sensible.

[Quickseller]

When you are calling someone out, consider sticking to the....observable facts...when doing so. Try to avoid the ad-hominem attacks.

[dragonvslinux]

Just based on the title of this topic, I have to strongly disagree with some statistical data. I only skimmed the OP, my bad.

Lauda's DT1 trust has been declining over the past year, while their distrust overall has been increasing.

This is particularly noticeable when we look at DT1 trust % (as well as DT1 & ex-DT1 combined that's now back over 50%):

To say Lauda owns the trust system is false. It's statistically clear they don't control/own DT, but instead are very close from being excluded after the recent DT shakeup.

[truth or dare]

When you are calling someone out, consider sticking to the....observable facts...when doing so. Try to avoid the ad-hominem attacks.

The facts are there. Ad hominem. ?? calling a scammer a scammer is.not adhominem. It is the truth. How do you call out a scammer?

Which observable facts are you disputing now ?

[Vod]

dragonvslinux - nice charts!  I'd like to see mine. 

[dragonvslinux]

dragonvslinux - nice charts!  I'd like to see mine.  

Apologies Vod, these are reserved for "anthropologically interesting cases" only - whatever the f that means, and you weren't the most interesting it seems ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Students these days will study anything, especially nonsense philosophy. I'm sorry you're not interesting enough, maybe try a little harder
I think I've said too much

Disclaimer: [...] All references provided are intended for indexing and informational purposes only [...]

If Loyce get's round to updating this list, then I'd consider doing DT trust stats for the Top 10 out of personal curiosity, so you'd make that cut at least  

[nullius]

Mods, can you start deleting posts by the lazy users who don't bother to edit walls of text before they add one line of new useless content?  :/

I am not even sure what such users are trying to accomplish:  It induces people to scroll on past, or even killfile.  Whereas basic network etiquette is not so much a forum rule, as a rule of the Internet for at least the past four decades.  (n00bs, n.b., “the Internet” != “the Web”.)

Students these days will study anything, especially nonsense philosophy. I'm sorry your not interesting enough, maybe try a little harder

Some of them even study the differing semantics of homophones.

(I hate people who confuse “you’re” with “your”...
























...their so dumb.)

h/t: *zing*


P.S., I escaped school early.  Perhaps that may be why I avoided such brain-damage as tends to be inflicted by systemic educational degeneration and falling standards.

You need education:  “Try a little harder”, as you said.

HTH, HAND.

I think I've said too much

[dragonvslinux]

Students these days will study anything, especially nonsense philosophy. I'm sorry your not interesting enough, maybe try a little harder

Some of them even study the differing semantics of homophones.

(I hate people who confuse “you’re” with “your”...

...their so dumb.)

My bad, thanks for pointing that out, have corrected my previous post. I actually hate making that mistake myself, as I'm fully aware of English grammer and (believe it or not) am a well qualified translator (french->english). But being partially dyslexic, I make this mistake too often, as I don't "proof read" my own writing enough.

I don't think it makes me "dumb" though, far from it. That's like calling someone who's physically disabled weak: it's an enormous stereotype. But then again, if you think the likes of Richard Branson, Walt Disney and Albert Einstein are simply "dumb" - then I really can't help you.

For reference sake, my partial dyslexia comes from having a foreign non-maternal language shoved down my throat that didn't agree with me*. I don't have dyslexic issues with French, only English, hence only being partial. Maybe try hating people who have (or have had) learning difficulties a bit less? Just a thought  

*This was the 90s, in the UK, when bilingualism was generally discouraged and frowned upon

P.S., I escaped school early.  Perhaps that may be why I avoided such brain-damage

Good for you, I wasn't as fortunate. My disgust for the English language began during my cognitive development, which took me decades to overcome  

[actmyname]

if you're can understand despite grammar poor then syntax not matter because communication critical is most and ideas underlying matter more than sticking to confusing rules in english

I was, however, under the impression that nullius's post was satirical.

Orifice knotted all dare and tension, mime a steak.

[dragonvslinux]

if you're can understand despite grammar poor then syntax not matter because communication critical is most and ideas underlying matter more than sticking to confusing rules in english

I was, however, under the impression that nullius's post was satirical.

Orifice knotted all dare and tension, mime a steak.

Oops, I didn't even realize

...their so dumb.)

"They're so dumb" is the correct grammar