Appeal of Ban Appeal: “hacker1001101001” spammer-sockpuppet menagerie

[JayJuanGee]

First of all, you are really all over the place with your post bonesjones, and mostly completely off topic... at least it seems... but maybe the only way that you can get anyone to read your long rants into purported character history and drama is for you to place such rants into a thread that was created and maintained by someone who has some amount of credibility for at least attempting to make some valid claims and to back them up by evidence and to maybe clarify or supplement within such themes... but gosh, bonesjones, you seem to so easily get caught up into discussion of supposed personalities that are so damned far from having any kind of meaningful relevance.

If I were admin I would want to take care of most dangerous and scammy members first. Especially if they were colluding, perverting the trust system and in default trust positions where their leverage could cause max damage to other members.

"If I were admin"?

I think that you are using that hypothetical just attempting to describe your idea of some kind of a gold standards rather than really suggesting that you would actually go through all the hard work of actually serving as an admin over years and years to build a forum, such as this one.. and maybe tweaking the various systems of the forum along the way.

There is one thing to start some kind of forum systems from scratch and another thing to attempt to build upon existing systems.

I thought that I had seen at one point theymos was considering the possibility that the merit that started in early 2018 would either replace the trust system or to make the trust system less central.

I will admit that there does seem to be some messiness in various forum systems, whether we are talking about how the trust system is played or the merit system or maybe a combination of them... and your suggestion of you being admin seems to have a lot of pie in the sky in it, and even if you might understand some of these dynamics better than me, I have a lot of doubts that you really are providing any kind of meaningful suggestions in regards to what you would do...

Now on the other hand, if you might temper your aspirations a bit, and request to become some kind of moderator rather than admin, then that might be more realistic.... though I doubt that theymos would want to trust someone like you with such power unless maybe he knew some of your other names.. your history is pretty short around here, even though you are proclaiming to know so much.

Another possible way would be either to create your own forum or to find a forum that is a lot more closer to you preferences in terms of being able to build upon it in a way that is suitable to your standards.  What is this forum in comparison?  Instead of having pie in the sky standards, you would rather build here or do you believe that there are ways to make a better forum, and then slowly start to attract members from here (or even completely new members) over to your purportedly better forum?

Keep an eye on nullius when he starts stalking and obsessing on female members. Limit post to 300 words. 1 post day max.

I do find this an interesting point because i have also been accused of having long posts that members proclaim to not understand, and you, bonesjones, are no stranger to the long post.  One thing is having long posts that attempt to state relevant things, and another thing is just to have long posts that clutter into meandering stream of consciousness ideas of only loose relevance.

In essence, long posts are not created equally, at least seems to me.

To jayjuangee - no, empathy according to nullius is tag worthy. Be very careful about suggesting people show empathy here.

 Hm?  Maybe the tag worthiness of empathy depends on context?  There are degrees to these kinds of matters, right?  Being empathetic and showing emotions are parts of being human, and yeah maybe we have some bots here, too.. and sometimes people become too emotional in their presentation of content, but those can be both flaws but also part of being human... I do think in order to have effective presentation of ideas it is good to attempt to keep emotions under control, but I also become a bit frustrated if any of us would be presenting models of behavior that remove emotions or presume that we cannot show emotions from time to time.

Nullius does not care about this forum.  He is here stalking for young girls to try to impress with his waffling memorized garbage. This is clear. He only wants to punish hacker to try to get lauda into some cyber sex routine.  

You are playing this angle of purported nullius biasness towards females quite heavily, bonesjones, and I doubt that it has hardly any kind of import in terms of what might be going on.

Don't believe me? Have a look through his history with alia and his posts about how he feels about lauda in a sexual way, and his red tags for empathy and or anything else from anyone who correctly notes his honey lauda is a scumbag. This guy nullius is creepy.

 I recall some of the alia interaction matters from a couple of years ago, and I have seen some of nullius's posts in regards to either talking about lauda or interacting with lauda, and again, it seems to me that you are attempting to read way too much into some of these interactions or even some of the history of nullius's behavior or a potential problematic pattern that might otherwise affect his ability to present forum matters or to even talk about things in reasonable and/or sensible ways.

I doubt that I really need to do any further research into the matter, and your seeming inability to even describe this matter in some kind of compelling way causes me to conclude that you are likely just blustering in regards to these matters.

Besides what real fan of bitcoin does not have 1.2bitcoin? Nullius is a total joke. Alia saw that and he was history.Delete his slobbering.

 You are saying that nullius has proclaimed to NOT have 1.2 bitcoin?  And there is some kind of relevancy in that, even if true?

Sometimes people might talk about their own personal finances, and we come from a variety of different financial situations, and sometimes we will also purposefully NOT disclose too many specifics of our BTC holdings or other aspects of our finances.  

But, sure,  I could see that sometimes in order to have some credibility in talking about certain financial matters, it can be somewhat helpful to attempt to talk in terms of personal experiences, too... which people might have some hesitancies to take financial advice from someone who barely has two nickels to rub together.

I talk about these kinds of financial matters in a lot of different ways, and I try to be sympathetic to the starting point of various members or even if members might have screwed up a lot with their finances in the past, then there might be some question of whether they are going to revert back to bad old patterns or even if they are willing to learn better approaches to their finances.

There are some people who are quite rich in their finances, but they still hardly know shit about their finances or how to manage them.. So, there can be quite a bit of individual variability and the extent to which they reveal personal financial specifics might NOT be completely relevant to attempting to figure out what kind of problem they might either be trying to solve for themselves or maybe if they are trying to help another member to figure out some preferable financial approaches.

Also, personally, I am a bit hostile, in my own thinking in regards to how any member is going to build any kind of solid financial plan that involves too many investments into altcoins or ICOs or various other shit projects.  I consider bitcoin to be risky enough as an investment, and bitcoin would be the starting point, from my own personal perspective, before diverging or maybe devolving into other kinds of crypto related investments that are largely heavily correlated to bitcoin anyhow, but tend to be just adding more risk and more likely to get caught up into foggy thinking.. but those are my biases towards bitcoin, and in terms of bitcoin versus traditional investments, there would be a quite a few factors to weigh in terms of where someone is at personally in terms of cashflow, which other investments, if any, timeline, view of other investments versus bitcoin, risk tolerance and time and abilities to manage any funds including researching trading or tweaking allocations from time to time.

Want to refute any of that? Get specific and we'll see how you get on.

It seems to me that I don't need to refute any of what you are asserting because largely, what you have been asserting seems so damned far from relevance, and if it does happen to be relevant in some kind of a tangential way then it is your burden to show how it might happen to be some kind of important considerations (which it seems that you haven't really accomplished in any kind of meaningful way and again, I feel a bit bad to explore some of these topics with you which are stretches of relevance, even if giving you the most benefit of the doubt in that direction).

[1714622845]

1714622845

[1714622845]

1714622845

[nullius]

This is an excellent general point which deserves far more merit than I can afford to send it now:

If I were admin I would

"If I were admin"?

I think that you are using that hypothetical just attempting to describe your idea of some kind of a gold standards rather than really suggesting that you would actually go through all the hard work of actually serving as an admin over years and years to build a forum, such as this one.. and maybe tweaking the various systems of the forum along the way.

I have oftentimes been critical of theymos.  Whereas I recognize the amount of work required actually to build and run a forum of this scale.  theymos has done it; I have not; and that is why I am currently playing in his sandbox.  That is not exactly his fault.

The trolling pretty much reeks of “I am so superior to my boss, I could run the company so much better; if I were the boss...”  LOL, OK.  Have fun with that.  “If I were admin” in a nice masturbational fantasy; but the reality is hard.

I have always recognized this.  Never before have I made free contributions of my own writing to any “user-generated content” site.  If I were to prefer otherwise, I guess that would be my problem.

Since my life is too valuable to waste [...] meanwhile, I think about perhaps some long-term way to make the forum trust system obsolete.  “Cypherpunks write code.”

In context, this is clearly a joke—of the “ha, ha, only serious!” type:

Announcement:  I will now found my own forum—just so that I can invite this user over, and

~

That is an excellent point.  From here, the discussion inevitably devolves into big talk about some plan to redesign the Web to have at least the decentralization that Usenet had 40 years ago.  To avoid that discussion, all I’ll say is that “cypherpunks write code”. :-)

What if Satoshi had sat around on a financial forum saying, “If I were to make my own currency...”?

Want to refute any of that? Get specific and we'll see how you get on.

No sane person grants the dignity of a serious reply to patent smear-attacks by self-evident scum who has no credibility to begin with.

(Now, if ibminer were to step up and properly take credit for what is essentially his own deranged handiwork here, then I would have something to say about that.  But it is off-topic on this thread.  Whereas I have not forgotten the relevant thread—just been busy.)

Besides what real fan of bitcoin does not have 1.2bitcoin?

Where do you get off making up figures?  As an advocate of financial privacy, I have never publicly disclosed exactly, or even approximately what I have.  Nor will I.  It is nobody’s business.  All that I have said, repeatedly, is that I basically put all of my liquid wealth into Bitcoin; thus however much it is, it is a lot to me!

Limit post to 300 words.

LOL.

The goal is to create new open source forum software that will directly compete with software like SMF and phpBB. Unlike Discourse, the software will be featureful and information-dense. Unlike Reddit, the software will support and encourage lengthy, high-quality posts (while allowing shorter posts).

pushing double standards and fake concern for the forum [...]

Free speech is getting crushed here [...]

Ban lauda, nutildah, tman, first
nullius [...] Limit post to 300 words. 1 post day max. [...]

Delete his slobbering.

Just an FYI, appeals or counter-appeals that get washed in several pages of arguments are usually not acted on by the staff.

So, what you are saying is that trolls can control the outcome by spewing garbage in a thread?  I should hope that the administration is not so trivially manipulable!

Setting aside trolls on the one hand and petty personal snipes on the other, the only substantive counter-argument has been set forth by PrimeNumber7.  I replied accordingly.  All other substantive posts on this thread have been either supportive, or more or less neutral toward my proposition.

Or do you really think that the outcome can be determined by a troll indulging his lurid slash-porn fantasies about me and Lauda?


Rule 34

Cheer up, kitty!  On the Internet, you know that you have succeeded when Rule 34 is invoked on you.  Evidently, in this case, we are now the subjects of some sort of BDSM slash fanfic—with the bizarre twist that I’m supposed to punish people to get your attention.

sexyscammer babe lauda

You can clearly see nullius has a new crush on lauda after his last scammer teenie babe alia blew him off. [...]

This is clear. He [nullius] only wants to punish hacker to try to get lauda into some cyber sex routine.  Don't believe me? Have a look

Wow.  Lauda truly inspires obsession.  Done fappening yet?

Untouchable, unobtainable ice queen
says MEOW! in blood-red:

perverting the trust system and in default trust positions

...I guess not.  By “positions”, do you mean, “Lauda on top”?  Or inclusions of Lauda—oh, that now feels like a double entendre!

how he feels about lauda in a sexual way, and his red tags

Great.  The trust system itself is now officially Rule 34 material.

This guy nullius is creepy.

I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say that you are projecting.

Now, to be helpful, I advise that you fuck off to theymos’ other sandbox at /r/GirlsGoneBitcoin (NSFW, 18+).  Pathetic sad sack that you are, I don’t doubt that you can pay one of those girls to indulge your very apparent fantasies about being dominated by a powerful female.  Because you are too disgusting to touch, I suggest that you see if any of them does FinDom (financial domination fetish; does not involve sex).  Pay up, piggy.




Now, back on topic:

Therefore:

[...]

• I urge the administration to review the case of a longtime spammer who was granted leniency for plagiarism!

Unpaid, non-ICO BUMP!

[bonesjonesreturns]

To jayjuangee

We seem to be disagreeing on a few key aspects.

1. When crying for a specific punishment of a member that context is relevant to ensure the punishment being called for is consistent and fair. I say it is 100% essential. You say this is irrelevant I dont think this is true.

2. That the statements I have used to describe lauda, nullius or any other of the scammer supporting gang are not compelling or that they sound bogus. Please pick 1 specifically and we can address it. Irrefutable evidence of wrong doing is there.

3. Many have noted the obsession nullius has with lauda.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225450.msg53957372#msg53957372

This is very similar to his pattern with alia.

The guy is creepy. Lauda sitting their flirting with him in private is gross.

Anyway. It is clear these scammers and scammer supporters ( I dont say jayjuangee is a scammer supporter although calling irrefutable evidence of scamming " nonsense" is something he needs to consider more carefully. )  are terrified of having their behaviors compared to hacker0101000101 so a fair consistent punishment for each of them can be handed out.

It is also clear this determination to see hacker punished comes as he speaks out against lauda.

We must not allow scammers and scammer supporters to use the trust system or appeal to admin to punish those that speak against them or whistleblow on their scamming.  

When any member calls for anothers punishment they may want to consider the passage

Matthew 7:5
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye"

I don't think they are seeing clearly. I am merely trying to help them focus and see the entire picture here.

Lol at nullius coming out of retirement to red tag for " empathy"  while protecting and supporting a scamming dreg like lauda.
We should take him seriously? Lol after already facilitating his other teenie female scammer alia.
Guy is a clear danger to this forum.

I apologise for being the only person that wants to see things fair and consistent here.
Siding with people you consider to have the upper hand currently is easy.

I stick to what I have said since the start

Hacker0101000101 is less of a concern to this forum than those trying to get hacker0101000101 banned.
His crimes seem less ruthless and malicious and he is not using the trust system or appeals to admin to silence those whistleblowing.
He is not on DT and is on a 2 year sig ban. Any further punishment can wait until we ensure these scammers are banned or can never leverage the trust system ever again to facilitate scamming.

TPOTO... lol I imagine that tune everytime you post now...


Nullius stop trying to deflect your desperate old incel frustrations on others. You have been busted being a pervy old desperate stalker lacking even 1.2 btc due to whatever excuses of hardship you were crying about previously. Alia totally lost interest when she realized you were a broke down bum. She asks for 1.2btc you only had 0.01btc
Lol at these " geniuses"  with no pussy and no money he hehe
Following around guys on the internet that pretend to be female to rope in desperate old perv incels just like mr nobody nullius here.
" never contributed my writing for free before " ... ahh that explains a few things.


Anyone investigating nullius past can verify all of this for themselves.

Nice to see him becoming upset and trying to bullshit his way out of it deflecting his own miserable life onto others.


Who would try to pressure someone to reveal their gender here and stil be flirting with them in private  before even establishing it was a girl?
That is super desperate and creepy when considering his other similar behaviors here.



/ thread.

I am still waiting to discuss specifics and make sensible consistent comparisons to decide if it would be consistent and fair to punish hacker0101000101 further.

[JayJuanGee]

TPOTO... lol I imagine that tune everytime you post now...

Since I am having trouble keeping track of all of the references and the various drama points, I googled TPOTO....

I got:  The Phantom of the Opera.    I remember listening to many of the tracks in that two CD set (wasn't it?) in the 90s, but then there were other Andrew Lloyd Weber sound tracks, too.   I am still not sure how they would connect to my posts?  

Regarding the other points of your post.  I don't see any reason for me to elaborate further on anything that I had already posted.

[nullius]

“bonesjones”, are you seriously quoting the Bible on me?  

When any member calls for anothers punishment they may want to consider the passage

Matthew 7:5
"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye"

I must observe the incongruity of your quoting that particular passage, whereas you are dishonestly attempting to fabricate motes in others’ eyes so as to deflect from the beam in the code-illiterate “hacker’s” eye.  This applies to you:

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Also, these were written for such smear-mongering liars as you:

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: [...]

A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.

He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool.

But never mind, for I don’t believe in the Bible.  It has no authority over me.  Go to Hell with your preaching.

Lauda sitting their flirting with him in private is gross.

In principle, I should neither confirm nor deny such speculation, gossip, and rumour-mongering about my private interactions with other people.  It is none of your business.

Whereas the types of rumours that you are attempting to incite are injurious to a woman as they are not to a man.  Thus purely for Lauda’s sake, I will point out that as usual, you cite as your “evidence” a thread which says exactly the opposite of what you claim:

3. Many have noted the obsession nullius has with lauda.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5225450.msg53957372#msg53957372

Quote of the referenced post:

It [Lauda’s ambiguous identity] is opsec by someone who is totally uninterested in the types of online relationships for which that question would be relevant.  (My own relationship with Lauda is strictly one of arts and letters and Bitcoin maximalism, some mild flirtation notwithstanding.)

As to myself, I get it:  You are a prude who is determined to police some twisted version of my private life that exists only in your fevered imagination.

These discussions provide the opportunity for a
didactic exposé of fine art:

To help you out, I admit:  In reality, I am like a cross between Byron and Casanova.  I have spent more time studying and practicing kāmaśāstra than science and technology!  Now, why don’t you quote that, PM theymos, and ask him to ban me because I like sex, and I am not ashamed of it.

Have fun with that:  Harassing me over my private sex life, on a forum whose administrator is a libertarian who runs a Bitcoin virtual sex community (NSFW, 18+).  Please be sure to quote Matthew 5:28 at him; surely, theymos will be impressed with his moral duty to ban me with fire and brimstone.

We will return to an historical discussion of
Praxiteles’ sexual relationship with Phryne
after taking a moment to appreciate this view of
an anonymous work from classical antiquity,
before Christianity made people ashamed
of the bodies with which they were born into this world:

Alia totally lost interest when she realized you were a broke down bum. She asks for 1.2btc you only had 0.01btc

Say what!?  According to whom?  Did alia tell you this?

This is wildly off-topic, and I will not permit you to derail a thread about “hacker1001101001” into yet another alia scandal thread.  But I need to make it clear in no uncertain terms that you are lying about me.

Also, “lost interest” is an interesting way to describe “was exposed as a scammer, temp-banned for doxing and extorting another user (not me), and then permabanned for ban evasion”.  And I am quite sure that she had already lost her chances with me by the time I publicly caught her lying straight to my face.  In whose delusion did she dump me?

/ thread.

Not for you to say.  /you.


Edited to add:

TPOTO... lol I imagine that tune everytime you post now...

Since I am having trouble keeping track of all of the references and the various drama points, I googled TPOTO....

I got:  The Phantom of the Opera.    I remember listening to many of the tracks in that two CD set (wasn't it?) in the 90s, but then there were other Andrew Lloyd Weber sound tracks, too.   I am still not sure how they would connect to my posts?

I think he was speaking to me with that.  It is hard to tell, given that his posts are rambling messes of disorganized thinking.  He addressed me directly in the next line.

—End of edit.—


Ceterum censeo...

Repeated attempts at derailing this thread having been so disposed, I remind the administration and global mods that:

• In May of 2019, “hacker1001101001” was granted lenience for plagiarism.  His ban was reduced to a 60-day temp-ban and two-year sig ban, presumably on grounds of his being allegedly an otherwise good contributor to the community.
• Since then, “hacker” has substantively admitted to being in the spam business.  There is evidence of him having been actively involved with paid forum spam as recently as November of 2019.  This is his actual big contribution to the community.

Granting lenience to such a character makes a farce of the forum rules; and it is manifestly unfair to all the garden-variety idiots who have been banned for copy-paste plagiarism, but were not involved in organized spam operations.  The solution on both counts is properly to ban the spammer-plagiarist for both plagiarism and spam.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Jayjuangee seems content to accept my stated versions of what I perceive to be our differences of opinion.


Nullius is of course TPOTO.
Trying to impress and win over anything that could be a female here. However although he wants flirtation and cybersex with them even if teenagers , it must be text based only lol because he is too old and hideous. He knows that is totally unrealistic for memorized boring garbage he spouts out can not mitigate the horror they will experience leering at them through his webcam.

Cross between byron and casanova says TPOTO

via Imgflip Meme Generator

Rolling around in your Basement with a semi inflated blow up Hermaphrodite doll with lauda scribbled on its forehead I guess does enable your old bones to get into the more advanced positions.

I won't allow you to divert away from the behaviors of you and your scamming pals.

I am not attempting to deflect from hacker0101000101 I am calling for hacker to be directly compared to your gang of scamming scumbags and sycophants. Let's ban those that pose the greatest danger and are most net negative for this forum.


What are you afraid of.

Lets start comparing hacker0101000101 with lauda?
See who poses the greatest threat to other members on terms of scamming and crushing their free speech

I'm ready. Let's go.

Hacker0101000101  is a very very low level threat to this forum in the context of those trying to get him banned.

No question about it. That is why they are afraid to compare.

I don't want to see those that will support and excuse scammers trying to incite punishment for members guilty of lesser evils .
Especially when it is clearly motivated by hacker speaking out against these scammers.

[nullius]

~

Completely off-topic, transparent to derail and divert a thread about spammer-plagiarist “hacker1001101001” into your sick-minded obsessive smear campaign against Lauda.

If it makes you feel better, go create another hundred smear threads which all sane people will ignore—against Lauda, me, marlboroza, JollyGood, nutildah, and everybody else who excites the fancy of your own internal demons.  I know you will anyway.

Now, back to this thread’s topic.

Code:

         +-------------------+             .:\:\:/:/:.            
         |   PLEASE DO NOT   |            :.:\:\:/:/:.:           
         |  FEED THE TROLLS  |           :=.' -   - '.=:          
         |                   |           '=(\ 9   9 /)='          
         |   Thank you,      |              (  (_)  )             
         |       Management  |              /`-vvv-'\             
         +-------------------+             /         \            
                 |  |        @@@          / /|,,,,,|\ \           
                 |  |        @@@         /_//  /^\  \\_\          
   @x@@x@        |  |         |/         WW(  (   )  )WW          
   \||||/        |  |        \|           __\,,\ /,,/__           
    \||/         |  |         |          (______Y______)          
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
==================================================================

[bonesjonesreturns]

~

Completely off-topic, transparent to derail and divert a thread about spammer-plagiarist “hacker1001101001” into your sick-minded obsessive smear campaign against Lauda.

If it makes you feel better, go create another hundred smear threads which all sane people will ignore—against Lauda, me, marlboroza, JollyGood, nutildah, and everybody else who excites the fancy of your own internal demons.  I know you will anyway.

Now, back to this thread’s topic.

Code:

         +-------------------+             .:\:\:/:/:.            
         |   PLEASE DO NOT   |            :.:\:\:/:/:.:           
         |  FEED THE TROLLS  |           :=.' -   - '.=:          
         |                   |           '=(\ 9   9 /)='          
         |   Thank you,      |              (  (_)  )             
         |       Management  |              /`-vvv-'\             
         +-------------------+             /         \            
                 |  |        @@@          / /|,,,,,|\ \           
                 |  |        @@@         /_//  /^\  \\_\          
   @x@@x@        |  |         |/         WW(  (   )  )WW          
   \||||/        |  |        \|           __\,,\ /,,/__           
    \||/         |  |         |          (______Y______)          
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
==================================================================

Hmmm ico bumping vs this behavior

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231720.msg53999975#msg53999975

Truth = sick smear campaign.? I see.

Your reluctance or rather terrified cries to disallow an open transparent comparison reveals you know you would be getting lauda banned before hacker and rightly so.

[JayJuanGee]

Jayjuangee seems content to accept my stated versions of what I perceive to be our differences of opinion.

No you are trying to goad me into speaking further about what seems to be largely irrelevant, and you have not really established the relevance.

Your proposed topic seems to be:  Let's compare hacker to nullius, and even if nullius does not seem to mind going with you down these seemingly irrelevant avenues, I am having difficulties finding how it could be very relevant at all to the OP.... and I am not even sure how much more even needs to be said about OP and the various back and forth that came out of that, so far.  The case seems to have been made, and it is up to admin if they believe that there is sufficient new information to act any further than what they already did in regards to hacker.. what they may have known upon dishing out previous punishments and/or if they might have overlooked some behaviors that are substantively and meaningfully relevant in terms of changing the level of the current punishment.

Nullius is of course TPOTO.

Fair enough that you were referring to Nullius because I truly was confused about whether you were referring to me.  I still find that it is a bit of a stretch in terms of how much milage you are trying to get out of this purported nullius weakness, but hey, you have a right to have your little theories, even if they might only be tangentially relevant in my current thinking.  By the way, I have heard you beat those theories to death already, so I am not really inclined to keep going down that path with you because there are only so many hours in the day to spend mental energies in regards to purported personal motivations.

Hacker0101000101  is a very very low level threat to this forum in the context of those trying to get him banned.

There are allegations of continued behavior, and I suppose that there are allegations that if some of that ICO bumping and the keeping of multiple fake accounts in order to continue the scam, then there is a problem with whether a proven liar can continue to be trusted in regards to some of the potentially ongoing behavior.  I am just stating the allegations, and I am not really sure whether any of this had already been considered by admin or if there is a current need for admin to reconsider whether the current punishment continues to be fitting, in regards to hacker.

No question about it. That is why they are afraid to compare.

That's it, you seem to want to create a compare contrast thread, and maybe that would be an o.k. thread to start, if you have not already started one of those.  I have seen threads that seem to be aimed at attacking Lauda and Nullius.. but I have also seen some threads that they create themselves that seem to invite such scrutiny.  I did not consider this thread to be a compare and contrast thread, even though you, bonesjones, seem to want to take it in that direction and even Nullius seems willing to entertain you in that area from what I have seen.  I am not going to go there, because I feel that I barely even know the allegations, but from time to time, I will see some posts from various members that seem to clarify some of the allegations and the evidence upon which it seems to be built (and sometimes even pointing out the areas in which the evidence or logic is lacking).

I don't want to see those that will support and excuse scammers trying to incite punishment for members guilty of lesser evils .
Especially when it is clearly motivated by hacker speaking out against these scammers.

Seems to me that the theme about retaliation from lauda against hacker had already been explored in at least a couple of other threads, and really there was not much if any evidence to support such retaliation claims (I don't claim to be any kind of expert on the topic), but whatever, you keep going on and on about that purported retaliation angle, too.  I think that either the evidence against hacker stands up or it does not... and purported evidence of lauda retaliating seems to be a stretch at best... but you keep saying it over and over, so maybe that makes the retaliation angle to be more plausible to be true.  Is that the logic that you are employing in your argumentation method, bones?



Edited after seeing the below bonesjones post:

[edited out]

Hmmm ico bumping vs this behavior

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5231720.msg53999975#msg53999975

Truth = sick smear campaign.? I see.

Your reluctance or rather terrified cries to disallow an open transparent comparison reveals you know you would be getting lauda banned before hacker and rightly so.

Holy shit, bones jones!  I had not noticed before that you are creating self-moderated threads on the person bashing topic.  How can anyone trust such content?

I don't tend to participate in self-moderated threads (or waste my time reading the contents therein, especially if I see that they are controversial and self-moderated) unless there seems to be a specific potentially clearly benevolent reason for creating the thread as "self-moderated" to keep out the trolls, blah blah blah.  Or, for example, if I realize that there is some kind of angle (such as a pro-bitcoin thread to keep out the shit coins) that causes some needs for the thread creator to retain some moderating capacity...

In my thinking, it does not seem appropriate to make a thread that is propagandizing about the behavior of members..  or their character... because that would be controversial... just my perhaps emotive reaction to noticing the self-moderated angle in regards to the kind of thread that you are proposing... .. holy shit.. did I say holy shit enough times?

[bonesjonesreturns]

Jayjuangee

But that is what I said.

You are of the opinion that when seeking consistent and fair punishment then context is not required.
I have a different opinion.

That is the core difference.

I guess we can just accept that we must disagree.

I do not support ico bumping for pay or bump teams.
I mean I have nothing against real believers and investors grouping together to promote strong projects they genuinely believe in.

I have a strong dislike of scammers and those that support them. I have even stronger dislike of scammers who try to use the trust system to silence whistleblowers and crush free speech.

Anyone pushing double standards and using those to punish strongly needs to be called on it.

I disagree with your downplaying nullius pervy old stalker who will endanger other members by excusing and protecting dangerous behaviors due to a sexual motivation.
That is another thing we must disagree on.

We can have different opinions.

[Harlot]

Fighting scam but spreading spam? I am not convince that hacker1001101001 deserves to even have a chance to even be here in the forum. It's pretty ironic that he is cleaning the forum from scams yet he is something doing against the rules by being involve in a bumping service. He might not even stop it in his own will since the bumping system in the ANN section of Altcoins have been change that's why he is claiming that he is no longer part of it. However if hacker1001101001 still wants to receive a temp ban I think it would be enough for him to spill out all the names part of this bumping service (with proof) in order to come out clean.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Fighting scam but spreading spam? I am not convince that hacker1001101001 deserves to even have a chance to even be here in the forum. It's pretty ironic that he is cleaning the forum from scams yet he is something doing against the rules by being involve in a bumping service. He might not even stop it in his own will since the bumping system in the ANN section of Altcoins have been change that's why he is claiming that he is no longer part of it. However if hacker1001101001 still wants to receive a temp ban I think it would be enough for him to spill out all the names part of this bumping service (with proof) in order to come out clean.

You don't need to be convinced. You just need to provide a credible argument that seems fair and consistent in the context of other treatments of those that have financially motivated wrongdoing in their histories.

Go spam " bitdice" elsewhere...harlot.

This guise of " scambusting or scamhunting" is a common ploy for those that wish to scam themselves and get away with it.

Those that will tackle any scammer or any scam on the same basis I can and do respect.
These fake scam hunters busting easy targets but supporting and excusing scams by those that could fight back are nothing other than scam facilitators and supporters.

There are few real deal scams hunters here and one just sadly passed away.

Fighting scam but spreading spam = perm ban you say?

What about fighting small scams whilst being a proven scammer who will use red tags to silence his whistleblowers=?

Hacker0101000101 already had a temp ban? And 2 years sig ban? Do you know this or want a further temp ban? Or perm ban?

[JollyGood]

Why on earth would hacker1001101001 avoiding answering the questions? Others are trying their best to defend him here and trying hard to deflect and misdirect but it all seems fairly silly to me when all he has to do is to own up to ALL his activities under ALL his alt-accounts.

hacker1001101001 surely deserves a ban for hiding his payment receiving activities and his alt-accounts even though he had ample time and opportunity to own up but whether a permanent one or a temporary one is given that is the real question.

[bonesjonesreturns]

Why on earth would hacker1001101001 avoiding answering the questions? Others are trying their best to defend him here and trying hard to deflect and misdirect but it all seems fairly silly to me when all he has to do is to own up to ALL his activities under ALL his alt-accounts.

hacker1001101001 surely deserves a ban for hiding his payment receiving activities and his alt-accounts even though he had ample time and opportunity to own up but whether a permanent one or a temporary one is given that is the real question.

Stating open transparent comparison for fair and consistent treatment is necessary = misdirection and deflection

Good try, fake scam hunter. Keep trying to rent that sig out

I think you should be banned before hacker0101000101 and are more dangerous.
I can create a credible case too that you will find hard to refute.
I see fake scam hunting as very dangerous. When you pick on easy target and punish those scams but say nothing to your friends who are willing to work with those same scams for a fee and help them back onto this forum

You jollygood are way more dangerous than hacker. Also you are a trust abuser and colluding with other scammers in DT.

You people are a real credible and very dangerous threat to people's finances and free speech.

Ban you first I think.
Keep begging, someone will rent your sig soon.

Your own history needs to be examined.


Edited , after I notice jayjuangee made up some nonsense about self moderated threads

Doesnt obviously mind nullius making self moderated threads regarding me? and banning me from posting on them? Lol

The difference is , I  specifically stated nothing nullius posted there would be moderated. The thread is for him alone.
Can you say double standards?

Or if he is referring to the lauda thread then i dont think any posts have been deleted.
So jayjuangee can read the irrefutable evidence of lauda scamming but his gripe is it was on a self moderated thread?

Go tell malboroza and nullius they are not allowed self moderated threads

At least I allow them to post if it is about them. The person it is about will not be moderated and the others can post if they are keep reasonably on topic.

Any excuse not to read and accept that these people he is siding with are scammers.
I have no interest in being friends with willful scammer supporters.

Pretend to be objective at the very least.
The double standards on this forum specifically to favour scammers is disgraceful.

[TECSHARE]

Why on earth would hacker1001101001 avoiding answering the questions? Others are trying their best to defend him here and trying hard to deflect and misdirect but it all seems fairly silly to me when all he has to do is to own up to ALL his activities under ALL his alt-accounts.

hacker1001101001 surely deserves a ban for hiding his payment receiving activities and his alt-accounts even though he had ample time and opportunity to own up but whether a permanent one or a temporary one is given that is the real question.

Why would he engage in your very obvious perpetual retaliatory interrogation? You lot of clowns have made it clear your goal is not to seek any kind of justice or reform, but to simply keep talking and talking making shit up, hoping that if you repeat it enough times people will just believe it. This isn't about protecting the community, this is about retribution and protecting your own personal interests.

[JayJuanGee]

Edited , after I notice jayjuangee made up some nonsense about self moderated threads

I thought that you were going to ignore that part, and yeah, I posted my reaction towards noticing that you had linked to a self-moderated thread and I questioned how that could be considered to be a reliable place to get information or to participate.  Like I said, I don't tend to participate in those kinds of threads for the reasons that I had already stated unless the thread might fit certain kinds of exceptions in terms of some kind of need for self-moderation.

Doesnt obviously mind nullius making self moderated threads regarding me? and banning me from posting on them? Lol

This thread is not self-moderated, and I did see that there is at least one thread that nullius had created about you, so yeah, I would not consider any kind of self-moderated thread to be allowing of divergent ideas, so we have to take the information that is presented in those kinds of threads with a BIG ASS grain of salt, especially if they presenting potentially controversial ideas and we surely cannot consider them to be allowing for dialogue on the topic.

The difference is , I  specifically stated nothing nullius posted there would be moderated. The thread is for him alone.
Can you say double standards?

I am the one that expressed disapproval of your use of a self-moderated thread on the topic, and I suppose that it would be a double standard if nullius would express disapproval of your use of a self-moderated topic, unless he is saying that he created his because you created yours, so in that case, maybe the situation might be more complicated, and I might need to either walk back my comments or reconsider my position.   

Or if he is referring to the lauda thread then i dont think any posts have been deleted.

I had seen that some other members have used self-moderated threads, and with Lauda, I could see a purpose for using such thread when she has been attacked for so many years... so yeah, maybe if you are having trouble getting your position out there, then there could be some use for the self-moderated thread, and I doubt that you should feel that you are having troubles getting out your ideas or that you need to have control over such a thread... but hey, maybe you will get me to come around regarding a presumed need to have made your particular thread "self-moderated."

So jayjuangee can read the irrefutable evidence of lauda scamming but his gripe is it was on a self moderated thread?

Would it be appropriate for me to ask which thread is that?

Go tell malboroza and nullius they are not allowed self moderated threads

Apparently the forum rules allow them, and maybe the prevalence of such threads are greater than I had thought.  I try to avoid such threads or to really take into account whether I trust the moderator to NOT be deleting comments willy nilly.  I have experienced some of my posts being deleted in such threads in the past, so I have really bad feelings about them.. so I suppose that it should be known that many times when such self-moderated threads are being used then the starter of such thread is only going to be moderately tolerant of posts that challenge some of the premises or the viewpoints that they starter of the thread wants to emphasize.   

At least I allow them to post if it is about them. The person it is about will not be moderated and the others can post if they are keep reasonably on topic.

Maybe I should be less shocked about the whole idea?  I suppose that in your OP you could attempt to describe your moderation approach.... so maybe I had categorically judged you too harshly.. I will give you that.

Any excuse not to read and accept that these people he is siding with are scammers.
I have no interest in being friends with willful scammer supporters.

Fair enough... I suppose that if you have strong ideas, sometimes you want to get them out there, and in principle, I suppose I am coming around to the idea that there could be some purpose in attempting to control the presentation of your message.

Pretend to be objective at the very least.

I am not completely objective that is for sure, but I try to be somewhat fair in terms of having some standards in how I view things.

The double standards on this forum specifically to favour scammers is disgraceful.

Double standards is taking matters further than just merely having viewpoints and standards.  You are saying, again, that I am employing some kinds of double standards because I reacted to your having that thread as "self-moderated"?  I will agree that maybe my reaction was a bit strong but it seems that I had already explained some sufficient context for my reaction.

[nullius]

Jay, that is an interesting point about self-moderated threads.  I myself exclusively start self-moderated threads, in all forums where it is allowed;^* I began that habit in Development & Technology, after some anti-Core/anti-Segwit trolls started to follow me obsessively—specifically targeting me.  (I wonder why.)

(* Except when after a twenty-month absence, I forgot about the forum bug that loses the self-mod setting on preview.  Oops.)

Whereas I am wary of participation in self-mod threads unless I trust the OP’s judgment.  Even well-known users can be problematic.  Apropos your discussion here, my experience with “bonesjones” has demonstrated to me that he does not moderate fairly, or even with basic civility.

Naturally, I trust my own judgment!


From the only important contribution that the trolls have thus far made to this thread, I have been doing some research of my own...

TPOTO... lol

I googled TPOTO....

I got:  The Phantom of the Opera.

...for I don’t follow pop music.  (Yes:  To me, that is pop music.)  I also looked into it; and, lo...

Nullius is of course TPOTO.

I confess, “bonesjones” doxed me!

“nullius” is Erik, better known as The Phantom.  Behold my glory!

Needless to say, I am pleased at the homage to my power and my genius.  I will post a new self-moderated thread about this sometime maybe much later, and link to it from here; however, I have no time to finish it now.  Busy.  —With Christine, my Angel of Music.

Meanwhile, back to the topic:

Why on earth would hacker1001101001 avoiding answering the questions? Others are trying their best to defend him here and trying hard to deflect and misdirect but it all seems fairly silly to me when all he has to do is to own up to ALL his activities under ALL his alt-accounts.

Ironically, if “hacker1001101001” had come clean three months ago, then my involvement in the case would have been minimal, and only at the periphery.  And though I can’t speak for anyone else, you know as well as I do that quite probably, others would have been forgiving if he had just been honest.

Instead, he repeatedly lied.  Whenever new evidence has been discovered against him, his story has shifted; meanwhile, he has hurled insults and wild accusations at those who have caught him.

Thanks to marlboroza’s tireless efforts as supported by others (including you), one lie after another has been imploded.  Whereas the code-illiterate “hacker” thought that he could more or less get away with it, just as he got off with a relative slap on the wrist for the type of plagiarism for which many others have been permabanned.  I lost track of the Reputation thread for almost two months; when I caught up, I was amazed to see that not only was it still going, but “hacker” is ruder and more remorseless than ever!

Enough is enough.  May I hereby light up a better way.

Fighting scam but spreading spam? I am not convince that hacker1001101001 deserves to even have a chance to even be here in the forum.

Thank you for adequately summarizing this whole thread in two sentences.

[hacker1001101001]

Fighting scam but spreading spam? I am not convince that hacker1001101001 deserves to even have a chance to even be here in the forum. It's pretty ironic that he is cleaning the forum from scams yet he is something doing against the rules by being involve in a bumping service.

I have stated multiple times I was involved in it before I was aware about the core working of the forum, I was/am pretty much against spamming on the forum and even discourage working of such misleading services.

He might not even stop it in his own will since the bumping system in the ANN section of Altcoins have been change that's why he is claiming that he is no longer part of it. However if hacker1001101001 still wants to receive a temp ban I think it would be enough for him to spill out all the names part of this bumping service (with proof) in order to come out clean.

Are you trying to imply ban as some 3rd degree torture treatment so that I would spill out... ? I don't have any internal knowledge about those services and the user's behind it. I am sure there are many people's around the forum anonymously offering such services which is out of anyone's reach, not even mine.

[nullius]

I have stated multiple times I was involved in it before I was aware about the core working of the forum,

Here we go again.

Ok, hacker, you claim you are not in this business for years. Not only that "600 days ago" become "300 days ago", can you explain bumps which happened in November 2019., a month prior to creation of this topic?

I was/am pretty much against spamming on the forum and even discourage working of such misleading services.

Now, where are the people who are so obsessed with “double standards” and hypocrisy?


Why should marlboroza always need to do the work compiling long lists of “hacker1001101001’s” contradictions?

Yes, I was involved in bumping business and I even had many other users working around me. I am obligate to not reveal anything insider from it and it is even unethical for me to comment about others accounts and there address transactions with one of my address regarding such type of service. But I am not involved in any such type of further activities from this accounts as I don't control any of them. I would also like to assure everyone here that I am not involved in bumping now and not willing to facilitate it in future.

I don't have any internal knowledge about those services and the user's behind it.

So, Mr “hacker”, you refuse to talk about it due to “ethical” concerns, and also you don’t know anything about it.  Is that right?

I am sure there are many people's around the forum anonymously offering such services which is out of anyone's reach, not even mine.

You managed to carry on enough such business to get yourself caught with all the evidence that marlboroza discovered, and yet you somehow know absolutely about it?

You don’t even know any information from your own communications and financial transactions with allegedly existing third parties who, according to you, are allegedly not all just your alts?

So smart, you are.  So l33t.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190528000850/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1021758

NO SYSTEM IS SAFE !

Are you trying to imply ban as some 3rd degree torture treatment so that I would spill out... ?

No; but your most strident defender on this thread has attested that I am everywhere, and I see all.  Well, perhaps it may be not quite so; but at least, I am capable of simple logic, as demonstrated above.

[JollyGood]

This hacker1001101001 was still proclaiming his innocence even though he was active in his pay-me-for-bump-services as recent as November 2019 (that we know of) yet he still tries to pull the wool over the eyes of onlookers.

What does this say about TECSHARE and bonesjonesreturns who are defending a known bump-for-hire service operated by hacker1001101001 just because they are suffering from an attention seeking disorder?

I have stated multiple times I was involved in it before I was aware about the core working of the forum,

Here we go again.

Ok, hacker, you claim you are not in this business for years. Not only that "600 days ago" become "300 days ago", can you explain bumps which happened in November 2019., a month prior to creation of this topic?

I was/am pretty much against spamming on the forum and even discourage working of such misleading services.

Are you trying to imply ban as some 3rd degree torture treatment so that I would spill out... ?

No; but your most strident defender on this thread has attested that I am everywhere, and I see all.  Well, perhaps it may be not quite so; but at least, I am capable of simple logic, as demonstrated above.