For DT1 members: mhanbostanci & alts

[marlboroza]

Maybe he had to lie because he knew you wouldn't believe him? There is always a possibility here.

Ok, so mhanbostanci sent PM and lied to iasenko because he knew I wouldn't believe him? And he has telepathic abilities and he knew iasenko would post it here and I will read it? Yeah, makes sense.

"So how right is it to find a connection between the Bitcoin addresses of users we dislike and forget about all their trustworthy backgrounds?"

Excuse me, but what the hell are you talking about?

What is mhanbostanci still doing in DT, user is merit/giveaway/trust/default trust abuser and he is trying to convince people that blockchain proof is not solid one, which is malicious claim itself.

[1714692740]

1714692740

[1714692740]

1714692740

[1714692740]

1714692740

[1714692740]

1714692740

[1714692740]

1714692740

[suchmoon]

Maybe he had to lie because he knew you wouldn't believe him? There is always a possibility here.

Interesting, not sure if we had this excuse before. So to cover up what is already an unbelievable story he made up an even less believable lie? Yeah that sounds exactly like the type of person we want in DT  

Just to make it clear, are you claiming that mhanbostanci managed an "investment pool" for his niece and his student?

[Lauda]

Stop going around in circles asking trivially deniable questions as the above. If the next post is another useless roundabout charade way of trying to defend the accused without any evidence, then it will be deleted.

Stop posting useless posts Blacknavy.

Just to make it clear, are you claiming that mhanbostanci managed an "investment pool" for his niece and his student?

I think we need to add this to alt account bingo.

[marlboroza]

merit/giveaway/trust/default trust abuser

I also have 2 eyes bro, how did he abuse the default trust system?

Seems you don't, you have loycev's trust viewer so you can check inclusions from both accounts. Here you go:

For account mhanbostanci http://loyce.club/trust/2020-05-16_Sat_05.03h/434984.html and for account ZZ http://loyce.club/trust/2020-05-16_Sat_05.03h/318348.html

mhanbostanci Trusts these users' judgement:
1. theymos
2. TECSHARE
3. peloso
4. EFS
5. goraset
6. teramit
7. MorpheWQ
8. Lydian
9. LoyceV
10. cabsav
11. ekiller
12. onurgozupek
13. bobita
14. Vispilio
15. wolwoo
16. Blacknavy
17. AlyattesLydia
18. PHI1618
19. gospodin




Zz Trusts these users' judgement:
1. EFS
2. goraset
3. teramit
4. MorpheWQ
5. Lydian
6. cabsav
7. ekiller
8. onurgozupek
9. bobita
10. Blacknavy
11. PHI1618
12. gospodin

And as for exclusions:

mhanbostanci Distrusts these users' judgement:
1. ~Foxpup
2. ~Lauda
3. ~Timelord2067
4. ~klaaas
5.  ~mindrust
6. ~owlcatz
7. ~Last of the V8s
8. ~termo$
9. ~nullius
10. ~JollyGood
11. ~GazetaBitcoin
12. ~rehberistan




Zz Distrusts these users' judgement:
1. ~Lauda
2. ~bobmarley650
3. ~termo$
4. ~rehberistan

I won't even talk about including trust manipulator to his trust network last week and some other accounts, but I am glad that you at least agree on this part:

merit/giveaway/trust/default trust abuser

Actually, it seems that you agree that accounts are alt accounts:

"So how right is it to find a connection between the Bitcoin addresses of users we dislike and forget about all their trustworthy backgrounds?"

Now do the right thing and exclude this abuser and his alts.

[Blacknavy]

Just to make it clear, are you claiming that mhanbostanci managed an "investment pool" for his niece and his student?

There are several possibilities that more than one person can use the same wallet.
Investment fons, laziness/indolence, lack of knowledge etc.

Now do the right thing and exclude this abuser and his alts.

I've never added Zz on my trust list, but I trust mhanbostanci. Therefore, he will continue to be on my trust list.
Since this message has been deleted by Lauda, I will not reply on this matter. Also, i'm busy atm. I'm out of this topic now.

[marlboroza]

There are several possibilities that more than one person can use the same wallet.
Investment fons, laziness/indolence, lack of knowledge etc.

And? What is the case here?

Now do the right thing and exclude this abuser and his alts.

I've never added Zz on my trust list, but I trust mhanbostanci. Therefore, he will continue to be on my trust list.

So you trust liar(your words) and abuser(my words)  

Since this message has been deleted by Lauda, I will not reply on this matter. Also, i'm busy atm. I'm out of this topic now.

You replied to my post but you ignored important parts of it because Lauda removed your post

[suchmoon]

Just to make it clear, are you claiming that mhanbostanci managed an "investment pool" for his niece and his student?

There are several possibilities that more than one person can use the same wallet.
Investment fons, laziness/indolence, lack of knowledge etc.

Ok, more lies and fantasies then. Let me know when you're ready to tell the truth and stand by it. This obfuscation shit is getting old.

[DragonDance]

to be part of a forum where proven criminals are playing the role of prosecutor, is probably the zenith of dystopia and totalitarian regimes,

however, even criminals deserve mercy, so I'll help terrorist ~lauda and her complicit DT apologists broaden their extremely limited intellect and worldviews:


ACQUITTING MHANBOSTANCI:

A senior computer scientist and academic likes to employ his students and nephew every once in a while on some errands / coding jobs for pay.

However he doesn't want his nephew to have access to the funds because he is a minor and he doesn't want him cashing out, buying drugs etc,

THEREFORE he shares only a BTC address from his own wallet which his nephew can then use to receive payments on some of the jobs he is taking online.

Riddle solved, I guarantee you ladies and gentlemen some of these DT cultists wouldn't be even offered a position at the counter on your local Burger joint...

[marlboroza]

However he doesn't want his nephew to have access to the funds because he is a minor and he doesn't want him cashing out, buying drugs etc,

That is definitely new excuse card.

THEREFORE he shares only a BTC address from his own wallet which his nephew can then use to receive payments on some of the jobs he is taking online.

mhanbostanci wouldn't agree!

when I realized that this account is my nephew,
I forbade him to use the forum. (He was 13 years old at the time.)

mhanbostanci wouldn't agree!

mhanbostanci probably lied because we can't handle the truth.

Maybe he lied to DragonDance as well?

[suchmoon]

However he doesn't want his nephew to have access to the funds because he is a minor and he doesn't want him cashing out, buying drugs etc,

Right, and also posts from his nephew's account and pretends to have a deal with him. Such a great uncle.

mhanbostanci wouldn't agree!

mhanbostanci probably lied because we can't handle the truth.

[Lauda]

A senior computer scientist and academic

Given his frivolous and unethical behaviour, he seems to be a very dumb academic if he is one (see tag on JollyGood and the endless pool of alts).

Just to make it clear, are you claiming that mhanbostanci managed an "investment pool" for his niece and his student?

I think we need to add this to alt account bingo.

A senior computer scientist and academic likes to employ his students and nephew every once in a while on some errands / coding jobs for pay.

Can you try harder at making up stuff? Definitely worth a bingo update.

[peloso]

I won't even talk about including trust manipulator to his trust network last week and some other accounts, but I am glad that you at least agree on this part:

merit/giveaway/trust/default trust abuser

also you mr.bastard won't talk about this trust abuser https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5248906.0
for hide your fucking skin

[Lafu]

also you mr.bastard won't talk about this trust abuser https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5248906.0
for hide your fucking skin

Never had and i never will , if i would abuse it  your Account and all your other playing buddys are would be already tagged !
Looks like you dont understand .

And the only Trust abuser are you here , you tried it an year ago sneaky and you failed .
Few weeks ago you tried it again on the hard pushing way with some others and failed again.

First you distrust all and a few days you trust all and few days laters after you got catched you distrust all again !
Sry mate grow up .

Back on Ignore again

@Lauda

Sorry for the off topic

[Lauda]

DT1 please consider excluding the users mentioned in the OP, and the users who are seeking to exact revenge via the creation and support of a frivolous flag.

bonesjonesreturns alleges: Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with Lauda is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions.
Support: mhanbostanci, muslol67, hacker1001101001, bonesjonesreturns
Opposition: Vod, Foxpup, suchmoon, examplens, TheUltraElite, shasan, TalkStar, GazetaBitcoin, Jawhead999
Insufficient support.
Support | Oppose

@Lauda

Sorry for the off topic

I am sorry too, I will not let peloso post anymore. 

[marlboroza]

also you mr.bastard won't talk about this trust abuser https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5248906.0
for hide your fucking skin

Lafu is really cool, exposing malware and stuff...

DT1 please consider excluding the users mentioned in the OP, and the users who are seeking to exact revenge via the creation and support of a frivolous flag.

Support: mhanbostanci, muslol67, hacker1001101001, bonesjonesreturns

Flag is opposed so no worries about it but members who supported such flag shouldn't be in system. I see that account muslol67 is not DT any more (he was DT earlier today or it has something to do with my trust settings  ), troll and Bump are not DT anyway so only mhanbostanci left.
I will probably create another topic because of retaliatory negative I have received, I am breaking my head for few days and I have no idea what author of that feedback tried to say, I might ask in Bitcoin Technical Support about this input thingy

[mhanbostanci]

DT1 please consider excluding the users mentioned in the OP, and the users who are seeking to exact revenge via the creation and support of a frivolous flag.

The flag has nothing to do with your lies about it.
The flag is evaluated within itself.
By speculating, you are trying to make people believe in lies.
Please give up this unnecessary hostility.

[suchmoon]

The flag has nothing to do with your lies about it.
The flag is evaluated within itself.
By speculating, you are trying to make people believe in lies.
Please give up this unnecessary hostility.

You either didn't read the referenced thread and supported the flag just because you don't like Lauda, or you don't understand what "high risk of losing money" means, both of which are good reasons for you to not be in DT.

I guess we need to thank cryptohunter for creating a flytrap for you guys. Any other disgruntled DT wannabes looking to settle their personal grudges via the trust system? Lets see if TECSHARE, patron saint of DT1 shithead guild will join in or will chicken out as usual.

[mhanbostanci]

You either didn't read the referenced thread and supported the flag just because you don't like Lauda, or you don't understand what "high risk of losing money" means, both of which are good reasons for you to not be in DT.

I guess we need to thank cryptohunter for creating a flytrap for you guys. Any other disgruntled DT wannabes looking to settle their personal grudges via the trust system? Lets see if TECSHARE, patron saint of DT1 shithead guild will join in or will chicken out as usual.

I know very well what it is to lose money.
Examine the flag.
Lauda and his gang can be as hostile to me as they want.
Unlike those in Lauda's gang, I am conscientious.
That's why, I can make a neutral decision on this flag.
The victimization of the users is obvious.

[marlboroza]

I know very well what it is to lose money.
Examine the flag.
Lauda and his gang can be as hostile to me as they want.
Unlike those in Lauda's gang, I am conscientious.
That's why, I can make a neutral decision on this flag.
The victimization of the users is obvious.

Cut the crap
you abused everything
what you could possible abuse
and then
you start sending those fake retaliation ratings
you supported fake flag
there is nothing neutral in that

calling other users a gang
but you
and your fwiends
act like a gang.

you left logic behind

[mhanbostanci]

I am a respected member in my local community.
you all tried to disrepute me for money.

You abuse the power that the community gives you.
Maybe my life is not enough to see justice.
but I know that, History and Community will not forgive those of you.