alts potentially manipulating the trust system - should they be blacklisted?

[DireWolfM14]

Their account was for sale for 6 months
The original nutildah was a nem stake holder and early dash adopter (should be wealthy extremely)
The old nutildah said he never wanted to use sigs to milk money from the forum
The new nutildah is begging for 0.02 btc loans
The new nutildah is spamming sign

Are you making an allegation that nutildah did sell his account back in September of 2016, or the months following?

I would like to see the irrefutable and conclusive proof...

Hypocritical much?

Assuming you are correct, and lets for the sake of argument say that you are indeed correct (i.e. the person currently in control of the nutildah account is not the same person who was originally,) what scams has this current biological nutildah facilitated?  Your foaming at the mouth, spreading this narrative that nutlidah is a scam facilitator, but wouldn't that only apply to the person who sold the account?  Apparently the person currently in control of the account is innocent of facilitating any scams.

Pretty simple logic, no?  

[TECSHARE]

Why aren't you stopping the goats from being raped Direpup? Why do you not do things I think are important and instead do things you think are important? All Nutilduhhh does is attack, but poor poor baby! You two should just share your goat already.

I wonder why we never see this kind of selective "analysis" on the merit cycling DT members. That's not abuse right? Nope, just a bunch of dudes hanging around blowing each other, perfectly within the rules. It is only abuse when your new butt buddies don't like it, when they do anything they complain about it is perfectly acceptable.

[marlboroza]

Voting with alts should not be allowed. At the very least users who want to have trust lists on their alt accounts should ask theymos to have those accounts to be blacklisted from voting. The trust system allows you to vote for each DT1 candidate once. Bypassing that restriction with multiple accounts is not acceptable regardless of how you feel about the person bringing this up.

This would be a beneficial improvement. I wonder why it is not the case.

Theymos said:

However, I reserve the right to remove you and blacklist you from future selection if you engage in egregious and obvious abuse, or if multiple known alt accounts could be selected.

I would call this obvious abuse...hm, is there any info on blacklisted users? Maybe CH is already blacklisted and doesn't really vote 

[bonesjonesreturns]

Their account was for sale for 6 months
The original nutildah was a nem stake holder and early dash adopter (should be wealthy extremely)
The old nutildah said he never wanted to use sigs to milk money from the forum
The new nutildah is begging for 0.02 btc loans
The new nutildah is spamming sign

Are you making an allegation that nutildah did sell his account back in September of 2016, or the months following?

I would like to see the irrefutable and conclusive proof...

Hypocritical much?

Assuming you are correct, and lets for the sake of argument say that you are indeed correct (i.e. the person currently in control of the nutildah account is not the same person who was originally,) what scams has this current biological nutildah facilitated?  Your foaming at the mouth, spreading this narrative that nutlidah is a scam facilitator, but wouldn't that only apply to the person who sold the account?  Apparently the person currently in control of the account is innocent of facilitating any scams.

Pretty simple logic, no?  

Poor imbecile

Either a scam facilitator or liar

There are only two possible outcomes poor fool.

He offered for sale
He sold or he didn't sell.

Let him choose.

He claims he is the original. He may have sold it to himself in a confused tman auction scamming ploy that went wrong lol

Poor direwolf tries to be a good little scammer supporter but gets wrecked every time

Let him choose

Read the referenced thread...oh you did and tried to make excuse there for your dirty mate. But got owned again. Whoops.
Then run away like usual
Dire logic

One must wonder why direwolf is pushing a point that has been pointed out to him personally but another poster previously who he claims is myself hehehe

I was apparently I who explained this to him before on the other thread but now he can explain it back to me like I never told him.
Maybe he think im a different person? Silly bitch

[TECSHARE]

Hypocritical much?

Assuming you are correct, and lets for the sake of argument say that you are indeed correct (i.e. the person currently in control of the nutildah account is not the same person who was originally,) what scams has this current biological nutildah facilitated?  Your foaming at the mouth, spreading this narrative that nutlidah is a scam facilitator, but wouldn't that only apply to the person who sold the account?  Apparently the person currently in control of the account is innocent of facilitating any scams.

Pretty simple logic, no? 

Buying an account is cheating, plain and simple.  It's no different than buying or forging a college degree, in my opinion.  You can argue that bill has been a contributing member of the community, and makes decent, articulate posts, but it was rooted in deception. 

If it wasn't intended to deceive the community why wouldn't he have disclosed that he had purchased the account right from the start?  Why didn't he just start with a fresh account?  The answer is likely to qualify for sig and bounty campaigns in which his other account was no longer welcome.

Interesting how your analysis changes depending on who it serves.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Seems direwolfs defence of this is that

Nutildah is a proven liar and imposter that gets him off being a willing scam facilitator for pay?

Is that your defence direwolf lol? What about you other failed defence in the nutildah willing scam facilitator thread?? Given up on that one?

Perhaps we need a nutildah a liar and imposter? Thread??

Which one is he direwolf because he has to be one.

This seems to be his motivation forthese wild speculative fantasies that he says are colluding to remove scammers like him from the trust system??

Admin not allowed to remove proven scammers from dt1

Admin must stop members voting scammers off DT1 based on speculation of scammers.

[DireWolfM14]

Interesting how your analysis changes depending on apples and oranges.

FIFY.

[TECSHARE]

Hypocritical much?

Assuming you are correct, and lets for the sake of argument say that you are indeed correct (i.e. the person currently in control of the nutildah account is not the same person who was originally,) what scams has this current biological nutildah facilitated?  Your foaming at the mouth, spreading this narrative that nutlidah is a scam facilitator, but wouldn't that only apply to the person who sold the account?  Apparently the person currently in control of the account is innocent of facilitating any scams.

Pretty simple logic, no? 

Buying an account is cheating, plain and simple.  It's no different than buying or forging a college degree, in my opinion.  You can argue that bill has been a contributing member of the community, and makes decent, articulate posts, but it was rooted in deception. 

If it wasn't intended to deceive the community why wouldn't he have disclosed that he had purchased the account right from the start?  Why didn't he just start with a fresh account?  The answer is likely to qualify for sig and bounty campaigns in which his other account was no longer welcome.

Interesting how your analysis changes depending on who it serves.

Interesting how your analysis changes depending on apples and oranges.

FIFY.

Apples = Your butt buddies
Oranges = Targets of your butt buddies

[suchmoon]

I wonder why we never see this kind of selective "analysis" on the merit cycling DT members. That's not abuse right? Nope, just a bunch of dudes hanging around blowing each other, perfectly within the rules. It is only abuse when your new butt buddies don't like it, when they do anything they complain about it is perfectly acceptable.

Which of the "merit cycling DT members" used their alts in DT1 voting? It sounds like very lame attempt at whataboutism unless you can show an actual example.

[TECSHARE]

I wonder why we never see this kind of selective "analysis" on the merit cycling DT members. That's not abuse right? Nope, just a bunch of dudes hanging around blowing each other, perfectly within the rules. It is only abuse when your new butt buddies don't like it, when they do anything they complain about it is perfectly acceptable.

Which of the "merit cycling DT members" used their alts in DT1 voting? It sounds like very lame attempt at whataboutism unless you can show an actual example.

Please put the use of the word "alts" in my quote in bold. Thank you.

[suchmoon]

Please put the use of the word "alts" in my quote in bold. Thank you.

Oh, it's one of your "guess what I mean but whatever you guess is wrong" games. So "when they do anything they complain about" doesn't actually mean that "they" use alts in DT voting, it means something else. As I said, a lame attempt at whataboutism and predictably off topic too.

[TECSHARE]

Please put the use of the word "alts" in my quote in bold. Thank you.

Oh, it's one of your "guess what I mean but whatever you guess is wrong" games. So "when they do anything they complain about" doesn't actually mean that "they" use alts in DT voting, it means something else. As I said, a lame attempt at whataboutism and predictably off topic too.

No, its one of those "I am not going to defend things I didn't even say and you inserted" games.

[PrimeNumber7]

Young man, you need to wash your filthy mouth out with soap this instant!

I didn't expect this sort of reaction from anybody TBH but now that you have I will try to understand why.

I wouldn't be surprised if suchmoon and LoyceV provided at least _some_ of the merits, as they have with a lot of the active members of this forum.

OK well lets look at it.

<>Merit Fans of truth or dare
<>
PrimeNumber7
<>

I am not a "merit fan" (an ambiguous term) of truth or date, I gave him a single merit for a post he made that I believed was objectivly high quality. This was and will continue to be the sole factor (above my having available merit and reading the post) in my decision to merit a post. I would appreciate it if you kept my name out of your drama, thanks.
In addition to the lack of solid evidence that TOD is CH, you really cannot realistically detect every instance of what you are describing. Someone could make several posts that deserve and receive merit and add some people to their trust lists that have less than perfect intentions, and add in other people.

You are also overstating the problem. TOD can cask exactly one vote in DT1 selection voting. TOAA can cast 5 votes. Not everyone on either trust list will receive a vote from each of them. It is probable that CH actually trusts the judgment of those on his trust list and is happy with his trust network, and as a result, uses the ~same trust network for both of his accounts. I would limit concerns to those not involved in more egregious abuse.

[nutildah]

Babbling about some hidden motives of the OP behind this thread. Take it as it suits you.

Still waiting on your explanation of what my hidden motives are.

I would appreciate it if you kept my name out of your drama, thanks.

You came up on a list as requested by teeGUMES. These are the top 10 members who have merited each respective alt account, taken straight from BPIP. And if such a request is made in the future, I'm not going to censor your name just because you asked me to.

In addition to the lack of solid evidence that TOD is CH, you really cannot realistically detect every instance of what you are describing. Someone could make several posts that deserve and receive merit and add some people to their trust lists that have less than perfect intentions, and add in other people.

Everyone with half a brain who has been around here long enough and is capable of speaking honestly knows those are alts of cryptohunter, just like they know you are Quickseller.

You are also overstating the problem. TOD can cask exactly one vote in DT1 selection voting. TOAA can cast 5 votes. Not everyone on either trust list will receive a vote from each of them. It is probable that CH actually trusts the judgment of those on his trust list and is happy with his trust network, and as a result, uses the ~same trust network for both of his accounts. I would limit concerns to those not involved in more egregious abuse.

Thanks for pointing out and quantifying that it is a problem, and for your opinion on the matter. Duly noted.

[Vod]

That's great and I agree. You can't deny that posting names of a large bunch of us that are labelled as "on the other side" is a good way to get this across.

I agree with this too, but you trust people who regularly post lists of people to blindly trust or distrust with no original thought.  If you believe what you post (and I hope you do) then you shouldn't call it out only when certain people do it.  

one of those "I am not going to defend things I didn't even say and you inserted" games.

You passed out last night before you answered how you knew this virus was a planned attack.  :/ 

[nutildah]

Now look what you did nutildah, you triggered the troll. Now troll will spam the hell out of meta and reputation, I am glad that I don't see their posts but I feel sorry for people that do  

That's a risk that had to be taken. I couldn't ignore this issue over fear of being shit talked in a dozen different threads.

I promptly put bjr on ignore, as I did with his other accounts.

[TECSHARE]

Now look what you did nutildah, you triggered the troll. Now troll will spam the hell out of meta and reputation, I am glad that I don't see their posts but I feel sorry for people that do  

That's a risk that had to be taken. I couldn't ignore this issue over fear of being shit talked in a dozen different threads.

I promptly put bjr on ignore, as I did with his other accounts.

Stunning and brave in the face of such an insurmountable threat.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Babbling about some hidden motives of the OP behind this thread. Take it as it suits you.

Still waiting on your explanation of what my hidden motives are.

I would appreciate it if you kept my name out of your drama, thanks.

You came up on a list as requested by teeGUMES. These are the top 10 members who have merited each respective alt account, taken straight from BPIP. And if such a request is made in the future, I'm not going to censor your name just because you asked me to.

In addition to the lack of solid evidence that TOD is CH, you really cannot realistically detect every instance of what you are describing. Someone could make several posts that deserve and receive merit and add some people to their trust lists that have less than perfect intentions, and add in other people.

Everyone with half a brain who has been around here long enough and is capable of speaking honestly knows those are alts of cryptohunter, just like they know you are Quickseller.

You are also overstating the problem. TOD can cask exactly one vote in DT1 selection voting. TOAA can cast 5 votes. Not everyone on either trust list will receive a vote from each of them. It is probable that CH actually trusts the judgment of those on his trust list and is happy with his trust network, and as a result, uses the ~same trust network for both of his accounts. I would limit concerns to those not involved in more egregious abuse.

Thanks for pointing out and quantifying that it is a problem, and for your opinion on the matter. Duly noted.

Lots of allegations  with zero proof.

Proof. Nutildah like the clear undeniable evidence you are either

An imposter and lair that tries to delete the evidence

Or

A willing scam facilitator for pay who tries to delete the evidence.

Claiming someone is an alt with no conclusive proof and just saying " people know"laugable.
Now produce irrefutable proof to substantiate your claims.
There is no proof is there?


Is the truth that you are upset many members have noticed your are a dangerous and dirty piece of peasant trash lurking in some dump upset you? Their warning other members and producing irrefutable proof of this is making you sad?

Please stop obsessing over these prior useful members that felt the need top earn others about you and your willing scam facilitating.

Or maybe you wish to refute this? I wil indulge you. Come on peasant scam facilitator for pay,  explain your way out of it.

Stop speculating, dreaming, hoping and guessing about why other members don't want scammers like you on default trust1.
Everyone with a brain knows they can't defend your willing scam facilitating for pay ways. The fact only direwolf has attempted to do so is strong support for that assertion.

No proof of alts. Malboroza and zorrobeck agree.

Shit talked = irrefutable evidence of being dirty piece of shit ...says nutildah.

[nutildah]

Seeing how theymos blacklisted this farm I think blacklisting cryptohunter's alts would make sense too.

Agreed. May I suggest to move this topic to Meta, and slightly change the title to make it more obvious the problem is with voting sockpuppets?

OK, done.

If he's not terribly busy, I would like to get the opinion of @theymos on this issue.

Feel free to also add any other alt accounts that you feel may be attempting to game the trust system like the blacklisted farm started by ac2eugenio.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Seeing how theymos blacklisted this farm I think blacklisting cryptohunter's alts would make sense too.

Agreed. May I suggest to move this topic to Meta, and slightly change the title to make it more obvious the problem is with voting sockpuppets?

OK, done.

If he's not terribly busy, I would like to get the opinion of @theymos on this issue.

Feel free to also add any other alt accounts that you feel may be attempting to game the trust system like the blacklisted farm started by ac2eugenio.

I think if theymos has time to give "opinions" on your wild and incorrect speculation of possible alts that have conflicting trust includes that are apparently colluding at the request of a proven willing scam facilitator who has a vested interest and clear motivation for creating such wild and incorrect theories.

He will certainly have lots of time to give a statement and take action on the facts that are contained here regarding scammers and wlling scammers and scam facilitators being on dt

Theymos should spend time evaluating objective irrefutable evidence that demonstrates some very scammy people are infesting positios of trust and pose a direct threat to the forum

Theymos should not be pandering to scammers requests to silence whistleblowers based on speculative crap scammers make up.

Imagine honest blemish free members wishing to see scammers removed from defsult trust 1.
That does not guarantee they are the same person.

I also note there is no shared cycled merit like there are between the scammy dt1 gang... that is the real abuse of the system.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190369.0

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231720.0


I think i said it best here

"I see a willing scam facilitator screaming for admin intervention based on bogus unproven speculation.
The intervention required is blacklist speculated alts from voting to remove scammers like himself?

So admins can intervene to blacklist speculated unproven alts from voting to remove scammers

But

Admins must not intervene to remove proven scammers like himself based on irrefutable evidence
As the anti trust system it's brilliant.
Designed specifically to tilt the favor to scammers but only those that scam the merit Staten the hardest first
Excellent logic.
Come and offer explanation that is not shredded "


Get these scamming sig spamming self serving scum off dt1 ffs.

Stop protecting and designing systems these undeniably dirty and scammy  peasant scumbags game and manipulate straight away.
Having proven scammers and willing scam facilitators for pay on default trust1 makes a mockery of the entire forum.