Should confirmed liars with close links to other liars and scammers be on DT1?

[Laudanum]

I note so many liars, decievers and scammers infesting DT1 and DT2?
This latest issue with Dt1 members being caught red handed lying to the forum and using trust inclusions and PMs telling people they have sent money to collude with them to prevent flags for companies they shill for is disgusting.
Should theymos start to fix these gaping holes or punish those exploiting them for selfish reasons?
Why are those caught scamming and lying and deceiving for financial reward allowed to remain on DT?
Where did all the old forum members go?
DT1 should consist of elder members than can sign btc wallets containing 100 BTC minimum that are never touched.  They should also have no affinity or sponsorship from any company. They should have been here since 2012 or 2014 minimum.
They must have zero occasions of any financially dangerous actions in the entire history.
DT1 is meant to inspire trust not be an elite scammers club.
Thanks dear friends for listening to my words.

 

[rhomelmabini]

Because trust isn't moderated, no whatsoever. How could you define liars and deceivers in the forum? I mean scamming can be concluded.

Where did all the old forum members go?
DT1 should consist of elder members than can sign btc wallets containing 100 BTC minimum that are never touched.  They should also have no affinity or sponsorship from any company. They should have been here since 2012 or 2014 minimum.
They must have zero occasions of any financially dangerous actions in the entire history.
DT1 is meant to inspire trust not be an elite scammers club.
Thanks dear friends for listening to my words.

I can still see old forum members here. I don't know where that knowledge came from that to be included on DT1 they signs BTC and whatevs, but I think that's not the point they should be on DT1, I suppose. By the way, this doesn't belong here, move this to Reputation board.

[1miau]

If you disagree with users on DT1 or DT2, show some effort to contribute to the community, grow your account and grow your reputation until you are DT1 yourself and you can vote as much users out / in as you want. That is called democracy and so far this system is working as intended by theymos.

[jackg]

Why are you following default trust anyway, make your own trust list or just make it blank...

You're better off reading reports and references then having an elitist system. Default trust is intended for noobs... Well its debatable how well both systems have worked so is every possible system in existence, if you put humans in charge they're going to make mistakes.

[Lafu]

Sounds like another Account from CH / TOAA to me !

Same complaining as always about DT1 and DT2 with the same content.
The only thing thats new there is not a text wall as we are know it .
So why you are not posting with your real Account ?
Oh wait , yes scared for possible get tagged from others ! 

[Laudanum]

On topic please.
The lies are confirmed by personal messages revealed. There is no argument or doubt about what a lie is. Or are you not clear?
A lie or deception for financial gain as you say is often also deemed to be scamming.
The standards of this forum have plummeted drastically from 2011
I don't even see more than a couple of DT from before 2012
It is clearly a conflict of interests and high risk to have those needing to whore sigs on DT1

So are confirmed liars and those trying to cajole and request others collude with their sponsors positive flag results suitable for DT1?
It is entirely irrelevant who asks this question. I can be however you would like me to be. Just assume that I am if that will cause you to shut the fuck up about the irrelevant crap and focus on the topic.
If confirmed liars and scammers are on DT1 and you enabled this then I hope you will be found complicit and legally held responsible if they pull a very large scam and being DT1 was deemed to be used as an enabling factor.
Previously some DT did pull some large scams although they have attempted to repay.
To any member believing this is not a topic for meta then please explain where else such a critical point could be discussed.the ramifications for this entire forum are clearly evident. 

[marlboroza]

Oh, another bitcointalk quiz.

I note so many liars, decievers and scammers infesting DT1 and DT2?

I don't know, did you? What's with all these questions?

Look, if there are such users it should be resolved within system, you just have to point such accounts and tell everyone your concerns, don't go all the way around.

On topic please.

Report off topic posts to moderator if that bothers you, but as you can see, probably no one from users above really knows what the fuck you are talking about.

[DoubleAweSeven]

Joking aside, you have no concrete proof but only speculations and baseless accusation. Some DTs here some DTs there, where is the proof good sir? Before you make an absurd statement, please provide evidences that might help your cause THEN we, member of the community, might consider your claims.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

This latest issue with Dt1 members being caught red handed lying to the forum and using trust inclusions and PMs telling people they have sent money to collude with them to prevent flags for companies they shill for is disgusting.

DT polices itself, and I'm familiar with the issue you're referring to.  Last I checked, there wasn't strong evidence that the above actually happened the way you described it.  If more facts come to light about it and there's some shenanigans uncovered, that member will likely be voted out of DT.

DT1 should consist of elder members than can sign btc wallets containing 100 BTC minimum that are never touched.  They should also have no affinity or sponsorship from any company. They should have been here since 2012 or 2014 minimum.
They must have zero occasions of any financially dangerous actions in the entire history.

If DT had standards of inclusion like that, you'd probably wind up with a list of members who aren't active anymore, and the net result would be a useless system.  The trust system is very far from perfect, but unless Theymos does a major overhaul we've all just got to deal with it the way it is.  My guess is that he's probably made all the changes he's going to make for a while.

Sounds like another Account from CH / TOAA to me !

Kind of does, doesn't it?  And I thought we'd seen the last of him--I'd hoped that, anyway.  It was so nice and peaceful for at least two months, and now here we are again with a disgruntled member bitching about the default trust system.

[Laudanum]

Oh, another bitcointalk quiz.

I note so many liars, decievers and scammers infesting DT1 and DT2?

I don't know, did you? What's with all these questions?

Look, if there are such users it should be resolved within system, you just have to point such accounts and tell everyone your concerns, don't go all the way around.

On topic please.

Report off topic posts to moderator if that bothers you, but as you can see, probably no one from users above really knows what the fuck you are talking about.

You claim that you know of no liars or deceiver on DT1 and DT2? You have not reviewed or seen evidence to support such a statement?
Are you sure?

Lets start with an on topic example.

Read it.

Thanks bro BitcoinGirl.Club!
You really need to ship this T-shirt  


https://streamable.com/7w307k

https://prnt.sc/tswrv9
https://prnt.sc/tsws00
https://prnt.sc/tsws74
https://prnt.sc/tswsar
https://prnt.sc/tswslg
https://prnt.sc/tswss2


Good bye.

What an shit head. I already knew the PMs were not only about taking a look. But another gem in DT1. I don't know how anyone would still believe the whole thing is not corrupted.

You haven’t got shit cryptohunter, I’ve just gone through my PM’s & I absolutely did not tell anybody to oppose the flag. I asked a few people to take a look.

Nice work boy !

You would need to ask suchmoon about the misrepresenting or deception he removed his trust in lfcbitcoin  for.
There is no speculating or groundless accusations. The above member is lying or just talking rubbish.

Dt1 are a nefarious bunch of colluding scammers or incompetent fools.
Presenting evidence that DT1 members are telling lies and trying to use negative and positive enforcement to lure or force collusion for companies they work for is bitching about the default trust system?
If you mention these facts then they shift focus to who is presenting the facts as if that somehow could invalidate facts or events that a tone can confirm for themselves.

Cryptohunter is every single new member who either discovers new evidence of lying or scamming  by default trust members?
Perhaps I must be them then.  I will be who you want me to be. But marlboroza wants me to be you the pharmacist.

Then again you could just fucking review the evidence and answer the question rather than trying to excuse or sneak out of it.
Do you see the confirmed lie there the pharmacist ? Answer ?

[jackg]

I note so many liars, decievers and scammers infesting DT1 and DT2?

I don't know, did you? What's with all these questions?

Look, if there are such users it should be resolved within system, you just have to point such accounts and tell everyone your concerns, don't go all the way around.

On topic please.

Report off topic posts to moderator if that bothers you, but as you can see, probably no one from users above really knows what the fuck you are talking about.

The op has been here since 2012 (apparently) but can't find the edit button anywhere: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5268455.msg54984425#msg54984425

@op could you just stick to one active thread, it'd help everyone understand what's going on much better. You can lock this one in the bottom left if you like.

Also the edit button should be visible in the top right of your posts if you want to transfer stuff across.

[Laudanum]

I note so many liars, decievers and scammers infesting DT1 and DT2?

I don't know, did you? What's with all these questions?

Look, if there are such users it should be resolved within system, you just have to point such accounts and tell everyone your concerns, don't go all the way around.

On topic please.

Report off topic posts to moderator if that bothers you, but as you can see, probably no one from users above really knows what the fuck you are talking about.

The op has been here since 2012 (apparently) but can't find the edit button anywhere: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5268455.msg54984425#msg54984425

@op could you just stick to one active thread, it'd help everyone understand what's going on much better. You can lock this one in the bottom left if you like.

Also the edit button should be visible in the top right of your posts if you want to transfer stuff across.

Completely separate discussions. One is discussing the suitability of a proven liar and scammer on DT1.
The other is discussing whether presenting indisputable truths that have serious implications for honest members and inviting investigation means you warrant being punished.

If you have read both threads and reviewed the links and still are unable to make a distinction then I feel you have done your best. I appreciate your help good member.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

-snip-

Hi Cryptohunter, Wouldn't it be better if you posted from you main account?

Being elder member in the forum shouldn't automatically make one trustworthy.
And how many people who have a minimum of 100 untouched BTC do you know still have time for the forum and doing the work of detecting and tagging scammers?
Come on, let's be realistic.

[Laudanum]

CMIIW, but do you imply that no one should be on DT1? If someone have 100 BTC or more, i'm sure they'll touch it.

It's not PoS or master node scheme where you get reward from freezing your money for some time.

If they need to touch it they are not wealthy enough to inspire confidence enough to be on DT1.
This is the birth place of bitcoin. 100 btc is only a huge sum to those that are not original or early supporters.

You can not have people on DT1 that are short of btc. Their need for increasing btc via sigs and other means will create a strong conflict of interest.

BCA - on the contrary those that have made their fortunes on here should be those that give back their time.
Dt1 does not need to be large DT2 can reserve only the large and disputed decisions for DT1

[Laudanum]

CMIIW, but do you imply that no one should be on DT1? If someone have 100 BTC or more, i'm sure they'll touch it.

It's not PoS or master node scheme where you get reward from freezing your money for some time.

If they need to touch it they are not wealthy enough to inspire confidence enough to be on DT1.
This is the birth place of bitcoin. 100 btc is only a huge sum to those that are not original or early supporters.

You can not have people on DT1 that are short of btc. Their need for increasing btc via sigs and other means will create a strong conflict of interest.

BCA - on the contrary those that have made their fortunes on here should be those that give back their time.
Dt1 does not need to be large DT2 can reserve only the large and disputed decisions for DT1

Correlation doesn't imply causation, just because they're early adopter, that doesn't mean they're rich. There are some stories of early adopter who lost their coins or wish they didn't spend their coin carelessly.

Even lower-class and middle-class citizens are allowed to be politician, why can't they become DT1 as well?

I'm not sure a politician is a good comparison. Also I am always willing to donate my time to ensure the forum is a better place.
Discussing whether a long and clean trust history,  proven net worth,  huge reputation and achievements here and being free on any evidence of financially motivated wrong doing all all ever along with many other sensible factors would be sensible criteria for DT1 position is exactly the debates meta is designed for.

On this thread though let's for now stick to answering is a member  that

1. Is now a proven liar.
2. Has been proven to take orders from other DT members that have huge amounts of documented dirt on them.
3. Is giving trust includes out to people directly after they refuted his sponsors flags that he lied about asking other people to do the same .
4. Is documented to on several occasions  write about child sex abuse on this forum.
5. Includes on his trust list those that have undeniably been busted lying scamming and implicated in extortion. Trust abuse is also a strong issue.

Is this a suitable DT1?

If you wish to refute or request details after reviewing the lfcbitcoin threads on rep at the top now then do so 

[marlboroza]

You claim that you know of no liars or deceiver on DT1 and DT2?

Now where did I say that?

But marlboroza wants me to be you the pharmacist.

Why are you making things up? I have never said that you are The Pharmacist. This user is deliberately trying to cause fight between forum members.

[Laudanum]

You claim that you know of no liars or deceiver on DT1 and DT2?

Now where did I say that?

But marlboroza wants me to be you the pharmacist.

Why are you making things up? I have never said that you are The Pharmacist. This user is deliberately trying to cause fight between forum members.

Look above you said you don't know. When I said DT is full of liars and scammers.
I just read you said according to the pharmacist dt must be aged 2012 and have 100btc or something just like what I had said?

Unless he shares my views it looked like you were saying I was him?
If you were not saying that then fine. It makes no difference to my thread. 
Last thing I want is you two falling out dear friends.

So far too much irrelevant speculation on "who" when it makes no difference at all. I am presenting discussion based events that anyone can verify for themselves.

Let's focus on the stipulated topic.

Let's try a simple one for you moronbozo.
Do you accept lfcbitcoin lied ?

I have quoted the post from hacker that contains the pms and lfc claiming he never told anyone to oppose the flag

Yes or no?

Let's see what moronbozo comes up with. Some strange excuse  or will run off.

The tactic to divert to who is asking the question is boring and desperate.

Should people who lie about asking others to protect their sponsors by rejecting flags be on DT1?
We can discuss his links to other documented liars and scammers  after.

[marlboroza]

Look above you said you don't know.

No, I didn't.

When I said DT is full of liars and scammers.

No, you didn't. You asked a question.

Let's try a simple one for you moronbozo.

Well, when moronbozo come here I am sure they will respond, in the meanwhile, can you tell everyone your story how you shilled hard for scammer?

Accepted or not?

Yes or no?

[OgNasty]

If you disagree with users on DT1 or DT2, show some effort to contribute to the community, grow your account and grow your reputation until you are DT1 yourself and you can vote as much users out / in as you want. That is called democracy and so far this system is working as intended by theymos.

Democracy doesn’t do so well online when the community is largely populated with filth that doesn’t care about what is right. The good honest people withdraw and the filth gets multiple alt accounts in DT. Welcome to the Internet, where good intentions get poisoned and die.

[Laudanum]

Look above you said you don't know.

No, I didn't.

When I said DT is full of liars and scammers.

No, you didn't. You asked a question.

Let's try a simple one for you moronbozo.

Well, when moronbozo come here I am sure they will respond, in the meanwhile, can you tell everyone your story how you shilled hard for scammer?

Accepted or not?

Yes or no?

Please keep on topic moronbozo.
You are free to create a separate thread then try to explain what you mean there,  I will always be happy to humiliate and eviscerate your arguments.

This desperate diversion is fun though.

Meantime its satisfying to see you are terrified to answer yes or no to the question about lfcbitcoin lying. What a dumb asslicking weasel you are moronbozo.

Thanks, your fear to answer is always a pleasure.