~OgNasty's self scratching

[Vod]

I highlighted the lies in red.  LOL.  This is why trusting Vod either means you are mentally challenged or have an agenda.

See?  Anyone who remembers his scam is called a liar, even though he admitted he paid out a 1% insurance fund of 65 btc.  

Do the math if you are not mentally challenged.   OG has an agenda.  

More lies.  It was my fiduciary duty to make sure that alts were claimed.  I did so.  I then only took what theymos said I could have.  It is not my fault if he failed to keep track of what alts there were and didn't bother to ask me for a summary before gifting all the remaining alts to me.  

People may have believed that if Theymos hadn't called you "tacky" for stealing. 

I will agree that is is Theymos's fault for trusting you, but how could he have known?

and you have admitted to my only problem with the attack on og you can doctor the evidence.

Loyce cannot doctor the evidence.

[OgNasty]

Don't know much about Vod except he fights with Og

This being the real reason Vod continues to troll me.  His lie-filled attacks on me are the only thing that give him relevance after nearly 10 years of participation here.  I don't think when all is said and done that he will be remembered kindly.  

I should also add that these creatures abuse the trust network as a team and so they utilize attacks like this "self scratching" nonsense because they know it cannot be used against them, since they are all working together to manipulate the trust network.  Actually not a bad approach.  Attack people for acting as honest individuals while giving yourself immunity for abusing the network as a team.  I will say as far as attacks go, this is one of the smarter approaches these creatures utilize.  Users like myself an philipma1957 were even fooled previously by it.

I'm just refuting you calling me a liar.    You said you lost 6,500 btc, now you are saying you didn't?

Obviously I wouldn’t make up a lie like that. I’ve never lost anyone’s money. Not a single satoshi.

[Vod]

Don't know much about Vod except he fights with Og

This being the real reason Vod continues to troll me.

I'm just refuting you calling me a liar.    You said you lost 6,500 btc, now you are saying you didn't?

Your story just changed from Theymos knowing the truth and trusting you in your ponzis to Theymos being immature and irresponsible.

I don't lie, Mr. Ogn, and things will only get worse for you if you continue to use me as your deflection.

I'm just refuting you calling me a liar.    You said you lost 6,500 btc, now you are saying you didn't?

Obviously I wouldn’t make up a lie like that. I’ve never lost anyone’s money. Not a single satoshi.

Silly OG.  You've already posted you paid out the 65btc insurance fund.  I leave this here as proof you don't have a good memory.   Liars need a good memory.

[Vispilio]

I should also add that these creatures abuse the trust network as a team and so they utilize attacks like this "self scratching" nonsense because they know it cannot be used against them, since they are all working together to manipulate the trust network.  Actually not a bad approach.  Attack people for acting as honest individuals while giving yourself immunity for abusing the network as a team.  I will say as far as attacks go, this is one of the smarter approaches these creatures utilize.  Users like myself an philipma1957 were even fooled previously by it.

You are totally correct in this analysis. What fascinated me most about this whole DT farce was what initially seemed to be outrageous claims by CryptoHunter / bonesjones / laudanum on the surface turned out to be 99% accurate, 1 by 1 he identified and dismantled the cultist signature abusers;

there are so many threads now documenting the hypocrisy and shameless double standards of the DT1 cult that it's not even interesting to talk about anymore, most people have voted with their feet and abandoned the forum, unless they were long standing members of a lucrative signature, in which case they are merely tolerating the broken forum to get the monthly income...

For me the only remaining question on this issue is: where do staff and @theymos fit in to all of this ? Surely this must be far from the vision for DT that admin first envisioned:

This is inspired partly by something that David Friedman said once (though I can't find the quote), that one of the requirements for a peaceful society is the credible threat of retaliation in case you are harmed. As DT was organized previously, one or both sides of a dispute was usually unable to effectively retaliate to a rating, at least via the trust system itself. Now your ability to effectively retaliate will tend to increase as you become more established in the community, which should discourage abuse generally. (Or that's the idea, at least.)

There is no credible threat of retaliation, if an independent member discloses and proves the corrupt nature of any cultist from DT1, he will immediately be excluded en-masse and get a few frivolous red ratings for good measure so that the signature revenue abusers will continue to have artificially green trust sheets under all circumstances. They are getting paid a few k / month to continue colluding and masquerading, there is very low chance of such deep-rooted and incentivized collusion to be overthrown independently unless theymos pays a few k out of his own pockets to motivate the honest members to political activism  , either that or he has to personally step in...


It subtracts greatly from the prestige and future potential of Bitcointalk that admin seems to have abandoned all efforts of fixing the broken systems of this forum for a long time now...

[Vod]

It subtracts greatly from the prestige and future potential of Bitcointalk that admin seems to have abandoned all efforts of fixing the broken systems of this forum for a long time now...

Getting rid of signatures will stop most of the problems you describe, including the negative trust you left me.  

Problem is, I've never worn a paid sig, as I'm happy with my financial status.  

You'll have to think of a new excuse why I fight scammers like OG and don't get paid for it.  :/

Hey phillip, you've picked the wrong member to base your trust on.

[philipma1957]

I don't think anyone is saying that Ognasty can't be trusted

Dozens are saying he can't be trusted.

7 years ago he proudly announced he paid back 1% of a total loss of 6,500 btc.   Now he's posting like it never happened, and even denying he ran that pirate passthrough ponzi. 

Now you may say ok he lost more than anyone ever has, but that was many years ago.

Then he held 500 btc of forum funds, got paid 6btc a year to safeguard them, instead he treated them as if they were his own and stole value from them.

Fast forward to last month - a users pulls out after he finds out OG is the escrow.  OG loses pennies (due to his own reputation) but still flags and leaves negative trust.

So NO - OgNasty cannot be trusted with large or small amounts.  Anyone who says otherwise, or says I lie about it, has a political agenda.

theymos said he did not have a problem with Og taking some forked coins.

it does appear he did take some forked coins.

now since theymos said he did not have a problem with that,

do you red tag theymos and say Og gave 1/2 the forked coins to theymos and that they were in cohorts .

You should based on what you say.

which is why you should let it all lie buried or expose that theymos let him take those forked coins why?

did theymos grab a cut?

theymos has said peace should be made over this. so is he the villain not Og?

btw the only person that verifies loyce list is theymos.

So the reality is.

loyce could be suspect over the self scratch list
theymos could be suspect over the self scratch list.

Og could be attacked over and over and over again by

vod,suchmoon , loyce because theymos does not want us to question him about allowing Og to take the forked coins.

so basically

vod
suchmoon
loyce
theymos
Og

all have  compromised interests in the self scratch thread here or in the forked coins which theymos allowed
so this is why I usually stay out of this.

A ) I have nothing to do with the forked coins.
B) I don’t have enough info to answer those points I bring up.
C) In general bitcointalk has helped a lot of people and I don’t want to attack it or its members
D) all but vod are on my trust list he doxxed Og so no trust.

I really wish this entire line was stopped by now as it always goes in circles.

[Vod]

D) all but vod are on my trust list he doxxed Og so no trust.

OG also doxxed Vod many times, called him a pedophile and tried to get him beat up.  

But you can still trust him cause you traded with him?  

I guess that makes you a hypocrite to me - too bad since we never had any interaction.   Take care.

Edit:  I had you on my trust list for some reason.  You were probably a good guy.

[suchmoon]

btw the only person that verifies loyce list is theymos.

I'm really puzzled why you keep saying that. All data that LoyceV uses is public. The above is simply not true. Anyone can verify it. I don't think theymos verifies anything that LoyceV does, he just dumps the data weekly for anyone to use.


Let's stop with the unrelated stuff. Probably partly my fault for debating various tangents. Vod, you have multiple other threads for your dispute with Og. This is about OgNasty's trust list self-scratching.

[OgNasty]

This is about OgNasty's trust list self-scratching.

I know you started it with that agenda, but it has actually correctly been identified as a thread to discuss your cultish trust usage and how it has enabled you to use this “self scratching” attack on reputable members multiple times over a period of years in the past as a way to exercise more control over the trust network than you deserve. Tell me, is that behavior deserving of a negative trust rating or just exclusion from the trust network?

I should also add that these creatures abuse the trust network as a team and so they utilize attacks like this "self scratching" nonsense because they know it cannot be used against them, since they are all working together to manipulate the trust network.  Actually not a bad approach.  Attack people for acting as honest individuals while giving yourself immunity for abusing the network as a team.  I will say as far as attacks go, this is one of the smarter approaches these creatures utilize.  Users like myself an philipma1957 were even fooled previously by it.

You are totally correct in this analysis.

[suchmoon]

This is about OgNasty's trust list self-scratching.

I know you started it with that agenda, but it has actually correctly been identified as a thread to discuss your cultish trust usage and how it has enabled you to use this “self scratching” attack on reputable members multiple times over a period of years in the past as a way to exercise more control over the trust network than you deserve.

I'm quite certain that if I start a thread I know what the topic of it is. You can start a new one if you don't like it.

Tell me, is that behavior deserving of a negative trust rating or just exclusion from the trust network?

What, sending a harassing PM doesn't float your boat anymore? Do whatever you want, sparky.

[OgNasty]

it has actually correctly been identified as a thread to discuss your cultish trust usage and how it has enabled you to use this “self scratching” attack on reputable members multiple times over a period of years in the past as a way to exercise more control over the trust network than you deserve. Tell me, is that behavior deserving of a negative trust rating or just exclusion from the trust network?

What, sending a harassing PM doesn't float your boat anymore? Do whatever you want, sparky.

A member has for years now been attacking trusted users and forcing the trusted users to remove inclusions for feedback that existed prior to them joining the forum.  They have done this in order to degrade the value of longterm member's earned trust ratings as a way to appear more valuable to the forum and have more influence on their own website which judges users on just these sorts of ratings.  

Conflict of interest?  Sure.  Shady as fuck?  Yup.  Dishonest?  Sure seems that way.  What is the appropriate response to such a user suchmoon?

[suchmoon]

[ lies and drama skipped ]

What is the appropriate response

~OgNasty

[nutildah]

[ lies and drama skipped ]

What is the appropriate response

~OgNasty

Well, also this:

[Vod]

[ lies and drama skipped ]

What is the appropriate response

~OgNasty

Well, also this:

Done!   Og's trust went from (about) 80 originally, to a high of 86 today, and now down to 75.  I look forward to seeing what happens as more people understand how he's been padding his trust.  My 36 actual trust score could be 10x that if I cheated the way he did.

Excellent work by the OP to point out this obvious abuse, as well as flush out a few more rats.  Obviously, the scum is trying to deflect.   I guess he chooses you because BPIP makes it so easy to catch abusers.  

[LoyceV]

and you have admitted to my only problem with the attack on og you can doctor the evidence.

This thread isn't even based on my data:

It's based on BPIP, which (I think) is currently owned by suchmoon and ibminer.

edit:  to be clear this attack on this thread done against Og  is done with evidence that may or may not have been doctored.

If that would be the case, don't you think OgNasty would have pointed it out already?

Only theymos  can refute or say the info is true.

For current data, I gave a few possibilities to verify it. If you want to verify what happened for instance a year ago, I don't know if theymos still has snapshots of the weekly Trust data dumps. I know the forum doesn't store any records on editing posts within the first 10 minutes, so clearly not everything is preserved forever.

btw the only person that verifies loyce list is theymos.

I'd be honored if theymos takes the time to verify my Trust list viewer, but I don't think he does.

loyce could be suspect over the self scratch list
theymos could be suspect over the self scratch list.

I'm not sure what this means/implies.

C) In general bitcointalk has helped a lot of people and I don’t want to attack it or its members

Agreed. I've suggested a few times that OgNasty and Vod should just get a beer together, and find common ground. Or ignore each other.

it does appear he did take some forked coins.

OgNasty never took Forkcoins without theymos' permission:

In the case of the treasury agreement: all forkcoins were always forum property from the beginning. I voluntarily gifted OgNasty the non-major forkcoins, since dealing with them would be more trouble than they're worth. The three forkcoins transferred to me were ones I specified. Airdrops are different. I don't think that OgNasty should've collected airdrops via forum BTC, but collecting and keeping airdrops was not prohibited by the agreement, and the forum has no agreement-wise claim on those coins.

[peloso]

WHY TMAN IS STILL IN YOUR TRUS LIST?

hey fucking owlcats ! Lauda terminated and she in your fucking trust list  WHY?

Because I value their feedback. Also, it's my trust list. So fuck off, Retardo.

so whats fucking you and your fucking friends  bastards discuss Og trust list ?
this is his trust list and it's none of your business you idiot

fuck off your self

Community disagrees with you.  You trust people when you had nothing to risk, simply so they trust you back.  My trust is earned. 

you are not commynity, you are scammer )
just one of a thousand scammers and shut op your smelly ass

[philipma1957]

btw the only person that verifies loyce list is theymos.

I'm really puzzled why you keep saying that. All data that LoyceV uses is public. The above is simply not true. Anyone can verify it. I don't think theymos verifies anything that LoyceV does, he just dumps the data weekly for anyone to use.


Let's stop with the unrelated stuff. Probably partly my fault for debating various tangents. Vod, you have multiple other threads for your dispute with Og. This is about OgNasty's trust list self-scratching.

no it is not the list can be played with , Loyce even admitted to that in this thread.

Like I said this goes in circles.

and

my trust list does have

theymos
suchmoon
OgNasty
LoyceV

vod was left out for his dox of Og while Og was holding more the 1 million usd worth  of the forum's coins.

do I think Og added the names yes I do do I think it has much meaning no I don't.

[Timelord2067]

You're actually the first to mention this. You're right, theoretically I could edit my Trust list viewer.

Technically both LoyceV and ( @suchmoon and/or @ibminer ) have altered the entries on their reciprocal sites - with good intentions I'm sure.

In LoyceV's case just recently there was the weekly trust list which was a duplicate of the previous week owing to the weekly run being done *before* theymos had run the list.  LoyceV then deleted the entire week's results and re-ran the sweep hours later (thus giving different results)

In the case of BPIP I'm not sure if it was suchmoon or ibminer on the edit button, but entries have occurred then been removed such as has occurred over the last (about two months) in the Trust Log page whenever a user removes their DT trust list - it is shown (I might be paraphrasing here) "the user has lost the ability to vote for DT2..." and then a long list of "X" no longer trusts/distrust this/that user" (again, another paraphrase)...  Those entries are then removed manually, or at least they were done manually at one point...

[LoyceV]

no it is not the list can be played with , Loyce even admitted to that in this thread.

I'd say it's inevitable. It comes with root access to a server. Just like theymos can edit any post I make here and do anything he wants to my account. He can even make it look like I edited it myself.
I trust him not to do it though, and that's enough for me.

In LoyceV's case just recently there was the weekly trust list which was a duplicate of the previous week owing to the weekly run being done *before* theymos had run the list.  LoyceV then deleted the entire week's results and re-ran the sweep hours later (thus giving different results)

I thought of that, that's why the new version had a later time stamp. Just in case anyone links to the old version: it's completely gone instead of changing it.

Those entries are then removed manually, or at least they were done manually at one point...

I don't think fixing technical glitches is a problem for trusting the creator of the tool. It's actually a good thing.

[Vod]

In the case of BPIP I'm not sure if it was suchmoon or ibminer on the edit button, but entries have occurred then been removed such as has occurred over the last (about two months) in the Trust Log page whenever a user removes their DT trust list - it is shown (I might be paraphrasing here) "the user has lost the ability to vote for DT2..." and then a long list of "X" no longer trusts/distrust this/that user" (again, another paraphrase)...  Those entries are then removed manually, or at least they were done manually at one point...

Isn't that editing what is displayed, and not the data itself?

When you purchase twenty small items and they are grouped together on your bill as "sundries", do you think the seller is scamming you, or just presenting the data in a different way?

This is due to a issue in my original code -no conspiracy theories here.   I compared the previous list to the new one blindly, which in the case of DT removal, made a lot of entries change.  Fixing that issue will involve non-trivial coding- they will need to remove the entries that were not explicitly done by the user.  In the meantime, if they delete erroneous entries that do not affect anything, it saves time, makes the report clearer, and doesn't suggest one person removed another when they did not.

(This is an off topic reply - I will not respond to replies)

Back on topic:  OG lied about not losing 6,500 btc.   Is he being as honest about his DT inclusions?