Why are you guys tagging Lauda's account?

[PrimeNumber7]

The scenarios you describe are applicable to any forum member with positive trust. It would probably be more likely to happen to a more active user because the Lauda account will show as last active as of a long time ago.

It's not as if it's an equivalency where all users thereby deserve negative trust to invite more awareness, although theymos should definitely do some trust feedback backlink on first-time PMs. The difference between Lauda and active users is that they can respond. It's a unique situation, bearing in mind the only other candidate we have to offer is satoshi, whoever they are. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Again, anyone who were to visit Lauda's profile would see that he last logged into his account in October 2020. The time between the current date and the last logged in time should set off red flags to trading partners (even if it was the 'real' person behind the account).

We have also seen that the ability to respond to a PM is not a sufficient safeguard against these types of attacks. Someone was recently able to scam using The Pharmacist's name/reputation by impersonating him. A scammer could go a step further and study a person's posting patterns to conclude their sleeping patterns and/or times in which they are unlikely to respond to any PMs they receive.

[lovesmayfamilis]

If I understand correctly, the OP is worried about the tags Lauda left to all the scammers. He believes that if someone leaves her negative reviews, then these reviews may thereby affect the negative reviews left by Lauda to scammers.

But OP, you have been on the forum for a very long time but did not understand the whole story.
Lauda is trusted by several DT members, her feedback, regardless of her presence on the forum, will be displayed in red to anyone she has left a negative trust. Everything will remain the same.
Therefore, you, as a real honest person , can also add Lauda's name to your trust list.
https://loyce.club/trust/2021-01-02_Sat_05.06h/101872.html

 And someday, perhaps by becoming a DT, you will also be able to influence Lauda's reviews.

They will come here again scamming, bumping threads, shilling and I am expecting alot of these accounts to get some positive fake feedbacks that will bring these accounts "back to life".

You just urgently need to study this topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5191802.0

[icopress]

In addition to leaving the forum for good, Lauda also deleted his Telegram account, (as it turned out). To prevent anyone from being tempted to use this username for fraudulent purposes, I have re-registered this username, (let someone quote this post).

• I registered a new account, set a @GrumpyKitty and threw away the sim card.
• I have set the maximum privacy settings (for calls, chats, etc.).
• The account will be automatically deleted in at least a year, (I have set the maximum time range).
• I set an additional password and logged out.

If still needed, contact me on telegram: @GrumpyKitty.

[LoyceV]

Quoting:

In addition to leaving the forum for good, Lauda also deleted his Telegram account, (as it turned out). To prevent anyone from being tempted to use this username for fraudulent purposes, I have re-registered this username, (let someone quote this post).

• I registered a new account, set a @GrumpyKitty and threw away the sim card.
• I have set the maximum privacy settings (for calls, chats, etc.).
• The account will be automatically deleted in at least a year, (I have set the maximum time range).
• I set an additional password and logged out.

If still needed, contact me on telegram: @GrumpyKitty.

I left a neutral tag. Since theymos banned Lauda the same way as satoshi, there is no risk of abusing the account. The sheer number of tags should be enough to get anyone's attention now anyway.

[eddie13]

False sense of security, protectionalism, yada yada..

[Timelord2067]

False sense of security, protectionalism, yada yada..

Not only that, certain users duplicated Lauda's distrust list, so if they then we're to actually review those negatives and find they no longer were correct we would then have an issue with a DT2 user's negative showing up which would give the impression that a user being accused has a red mark against their name which as it turns out is false.

(And that doesn't include the dozens of hysterical negative trust feedbacks Lauda left towards the end).

[Vod]

• The account will be automatically deleted in at least a year, (I have set the maximum time range).

What does this mean?   Will the name be registerable again in a year?

[icopress]

What does this mean?   Will the name be registerable again in a year?

«By default, Telegram gives you 6 months of inactivity before deleting your account, to help the company conserve disk space on its servers. This means that if you don't log into your Telegram account during that period of time, your whole account will be wiped away ... groups, messages, contacts ... »

I have not been active in the telegram for a long time, but at least before there were just such rules ... Account deletion can happen much later, I remember cases when the @username remained active and for two years (not deleted). So the settings that I have set will allow for at least a year not to worry about someone taking over Lauda's @username.

[actmyname]

So the settings that I have set will allow for at least a year not to worry about someone taking over Lauda's @username.

Would it have been possible to have converted the username into that of a bot? Just a simple single-response, "this bot is not active" (or the like), and it's not in any danger.

I hope the privacy settings were set appropriately, since theoretically someone could "time" the deletion of the GrumpyKitten account to begin a malicious takeover.

[icopress]

Would it have been possible to have converted the username into that of a bot? Just a simple single-response, "this bot is not active" (or the like), and it's not in any danger.

I hope the privacy settings were set appropriately, since theoretically someone could "time" the deletion of the GrumpyKitten account to begin a malicious takeover.

It seems to me that connecting a bot is too much ... Calculating the time for deleting an account is not so easy (as I said, a reset can happen much later). Unless of course you devote a lot of time to this issue, including monitoring, etc. There is another way to get the @GrumpyKitty name, but it is highly unlikely that anyone will succeed, (provided that you prove that you own the same username on at least two of these services: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram).

[nullius]

As described below, I believe that I was inadvertently responsible for this.  I intended to settle it with DTs via PM, but didn’t get around to it.  I request that everyone who has red-tagged Lauda for the purpose of warning that she’s gone should agree to neutralize negative feedback.

Because the Lauda account is permanently disabled from login, to use it for posts or PMs requires obtaining administrative-level access to undo whatever theymos did.  If a hacker were to obtain such access, he could simply delete all negative feedback from the trust database; therefore, the red tags are completely useless for their stated purpose of warning people that this account should never make new posts or PMs.

Such a hacker could also post as Satoshi.  In this aspect, why should Lauda’s account be treated to a different standard than Satoshi’s?  —Or should we all now red-tag Satoshi’s account, for no reason but to warn people not to trust new posts or PMs from uid=3?


Unfortunately, I started the trend:  I was the first to red-tag Lauda’s account.  I did it because she asked me to, at a time more than seven hours before theymos arrived on her goodbye thread.  Or to be more precise:  I asked her if I should tag her account, and she said yes.

From my perspective, it was a very bad moment.  The question of my tag on Lauda’s account was low in my priorities, and would be for some time.

Lauda herself obviously had no way of knowing with certainty how theymos would handle this; and it is no secret that she was still online when I tagged her account, because she sent merit to this (albeit not specifically to this^*):

Merited by Lauda (5)

I have tagged Lauda’s account.  I advise that DT should do likewise.

(I will now edit that post, which is hereto unedited.)

By the time that theymos replied, Lauda was long gone.

It's sad to see you go. Although there were various small bits of drama and conflict, you've been one of the most active and dedicated members of the community over the course of several years. (And if there's no conflict, then probably nothing is actually being accomplished.) I hope that you're not in any actual danger, and I hope that you will be successful in whatever you choose for your future.

I will request that theymos ban the "Lauda" account (u=101872)

Done. Lauda is banned in the same way as satoshi, such that it isn't possible to even log into the account anymore.

At that point, I saw my tag as an historical artifact.  I couldn’t ask Lauda if she wanted me to untag her account.  But I didn’t think that it was too important, because I am not in DT; and anyone who trust-includes me must be savvy enough to know to ignore my tag on Lauda.  Thus rather than deleting anything, I countered my own tag with new positive trust feedback, so that Lauda is +2/-1 from me.

This is my current feedback to Lauda, excluding some neutral notes:

Trust summary for Lauda

Trusted feedback

nullius	2020-10-21	Reference	Principled. No hypocrisy. — What money the account *could* have sold for! Or she was perfectly set up for an exit scam. Honesty is what one is, not only what one does.
nullius	2020-10-19	Reference	Starting with the date of this feedback, do NOT trust any further interaction with this account, or with anybody claiming to be Lauda. All of Lauda’s cryptographic keys have been revoked, and there is no way to contact her.
nullius	2020-03-04		Lauda is superlatively trustworthy with confidential information which she has promised to keep as such. I say this based on my substantial experience with her handling of confidential information. For obvious reasons, I cannot publicly disclose evidence of that experience; nevertheless, I will personally vouch that I would trust her with almost anything. — Also, I would trust Lauda (and have trusted Lauda) with money that I could not afford to lose—with no better recourse than opening a Reputation thread, if she were to steal it.

I will now neutralize my red tag (d=271846).

* After I sent her 50 merits, and she thus had 25 sMerits, Lauda sent 5 merits each to the first four replies on her thread.  This happened to include two of mine.  She then sent her last 5 sMerits to Satoshi’s last post, and disappeared.

[worldofcoins]

All I am trying to say is that she did nothing wrong to get these negative trusts

And what we are trying to say is that those trusts look, but are not negative.  They are simply pointing out the account is dead.

Our feedback lets newbies know they should not trust the account should it reawaken, but they can still trust the feedback the account left.

isn't lauda's account permanently banned by theymos? is there any possibility a parma banned account can be hacked and start posting and scamming people?

The account's banned just like Sathosi's. There's no valid password for logging in to account Lauda.