'John Abraham ≈ naim027' Coincidence or Connection?

[AB de Royse777]

That official account of Paradice.in is not someone personal property. It's representing a business.

But 'naim027' had used the Paradice representative account as his personal property by exchanging merits with his alt accounts. Don't you think it was offensive? Or you will consider it as a part of the business. Seems like you weren't aware of the merit trading history of 'naim027' which he did with the Paradice representative account.

Understand that my statement was not for naim027, nor for the casino account. I don't want to engage with forum users personal issues with each others. Did you read that I did not look at that Cratoon account?

Anyway are we talking about John Abraham ≈ naim027 or Cratoon ≈ John Abraham ≈ naim027 or ~

This topic was created to find more evidence between 'John Abraham and 'naim027' account. But some other users are trying to risk their reputation by taking the side of the professional liar (naim027) by ignoring the evidence.

Keep me excluded however I don't thinking if anyone is defending anyone will result others to risk their reputation. Where did you get that theory?

In theory: If anyone ask me to recommend Nain027 if he add me on his CV for reference then I don't think I am going to tell them anything negative as he worked very well in my business. I have no complain for the job he does for my service.

Edit:

Your rule does not say anything about account y can not be used by "Mr a" as a part of the group.  It says a person can not use or create another account and the interpretation is for his own personal account/s. In example cases we have seen all these were, their own personal accounts.

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of the forum (not mine) rule. (Again).

The rule specifically states that you cannot "use or create accounts" as long as one of your accounts is banned. I don't see what is not clear and open to interpretation. Nowhere is the distinction made between "personal" accounts and "business" accounts. I don't know where you got that from.

So, if account X (owned by person X) is banned, then person X is not allowed to manage company Y's account (or any other account) on this platform. The ban evasion rule would not make any sense otherwise.

That does not mean I have to agree with your interpretation.
The ban evasion rule only make sense for accounts that is in use for personal reason - when it's personal accounts.

PS: For a moment I thought I was answering the same person in this post instead of you and OP.

[nutildah]

In theory: If anyone ask me to recommend Nain027 if he add me on his CV for reference then I don't think I am going to tell them anything negative as he worked very well in my business. I have no complain for the job he does for my service.

Oof. This guy obviously has no problem lying to anybody at any given time -- I'd think that would weigh on your decision to act as a reference for him. What would happen in the case that you vouched for him and then he went on to screw over a future employer?


Funny how this turned out to be somewhat prophetic:

I will create 100 more accounts as soon as I can.

I am certain he has more accounts currently at work but he'll be a bit more clever in masking them from hereon out.

[jokers10]

That's exaggerated to the point of absurdity. But, if the owner of a grocery store is aware that one of their employees is involved in criminal activities, including being a killer, and fails to report them to the authorities, they bear responsibility as it is their legal obligation to do so. In such a scenario, as a customer, would you feel comfortable patronizing such a grocery store?

The main thing in here is IF. If the owner of grocery store is involved in a crime anyhow it should be proved. Otherwise demanding from a project to watch their employees is contrary to a person's right to privacy. I don't want any my employer to shadow me.

But 'naim027' had used the Paradice representative account as his personal property by exchanging merits with his alt accounts. Don't you think it was offensive? Or you will consider it as a part of the business. Seems like you weren't aware of the merit trading history of 'naim027' which he did with the Paradice representative account.

It looks inappropriate but until proven that the owners of Paradice took part in that, we can consider that they are victims in this story also. Because naim027 used their corporate account for personal goals.

I don't know if Paradice are actively involved in this case anyhow but as for now I don't see any direct proofs that they are. If they did anything wrong as a project it should be proven, not just saying that one of their employees did something wrong when was working for them.

[Mahdirakib]

I don't think John could be Naim. ~snip~
I am here on request of Naim. I am not here to prove anything. ~

I'm wondering why are you making post here on the request of 'naim027' if you don't have anything to prove! It doesn't matter here what you think without any evidence. Haven't you noticed that 'naim027' has risked your account by exchanging merits with his alt?

Did you read that I did not look at that Cratoon account?

I just read your previous reply and noticed that you weren't aware of the merit trading activity which 'naim027' did with 'Cratoon' account.

Keep me excluded however I don't thinking if anyone is defending anyone will result others to risk their reputation. Where did you get that theory?

The second part of the quote was for Paradice representative account, and the theory is merit trading. 'Cratoon' is still making posts on behalf of or on the request of 'naim027' even though he was informed that what 'naim027' did.

[LoyceV]

I am Seva from Paradice.in
Naim sent me a DM asking me to say something here.
I can only say that Naim and John worked for Paradice.in
John resigned on 26th March 2021. While Naim worked with us till 5th May 2023.
Both handled our BitcoinTalk profile. John handled our profile from 2020 to 2021, and Naim handled it from 2021 to 2023.
Naim asked me at least to say that they worked for us. Yes, they worked for us, and we never suspected they could be the same person. During their working time, they worked at different times while our support agents tried not to overlap.

Since you already confirmed the suspected alt accounts have had access to this account in the past, who's to say they're not behind it now?

For some reason if Royse777 is banned, how many will say CasinoCritique is ban evading? There can be another situation too. For some reasons if the casinocritique account receives a temp ban then do you think Royse777 will ban evading?

That's one of the risks of sharing an account with multiple people: you're all liable for anything done with that account. And if it gets banned, I'd say it applies to all alt-accounts that also used the same "shared" account.

Full disclosure: There are few other malfunctioning brains like you and they may agree with you.

Full disclosure: I think I'm one of them Or else it may be you

I am (the person behind Royse777 right now) temp banned for 14 days. CasinoCritique is the account representing casinociritique.com. People handling casinocritque are: I, Mr. X, Mr. Y.

During my ban. Mr. X posted something, Mr. Y posted something and I also posted something too.

Since your brain is malfunctioning, you are going to say Royse777 is ban evading.

If you (the banned guy sitting behind your keyboard in this scenario) posts using the "shared" account, you're guilty of ban evading (which deserves a permanent ban).

The answer is not going to be straight forward.

It may get more complicated if not you, but some of the other people used the "shared" account. But considering how difficult it would be to prove that, it's much safer not to use the "shared" account at all if either one of the users with access is banned.

If casinocritique was not representing casinocritique.com but it was representing Royse777 then casinocritique was breaking rules.

It doesn't matter who you (claim to) represent: bans are personal, they're not limited to an account, but to a person. If I'd get banned, I wouldn't be allowed to create an alt and then say I represent the pope. I think you completely misunderstood how bans on Bitcointalk work.

how a business account can be treated as a personal account where it's obvious that the business account was not handled by the single person who was accused to have a ban on the forum?

Bitcointalk doesn't offer "business accounts". It's very simple: when you're banned, you're obviously also not allowed to use someone else's account. Just to be sure, let's ask the author of the unofficial forum rules (I now want to know who gets to have "malfunctioning brains" as personal text).

[jokers10]

It doesn't matter who you (claim to) represent: bans are personal, they're not limited to an account, but to a person. If I'd get banned, I wouldn't be allowed to create an alt and then say I represent the pope. I think you completely misunderstood how bans on Bitcointalk work.

Well, okay, let's imagine for instance that Tether comes to the forum and opens its topic to share news and answer questions. They hire one representative after another and this goes on for some time. Then it's revealed anyhow that one of those guys they hired was a ban evader during he worked for Tether as their representative. So we say that it was a violation (it was, I don't say wasn't) so we ban an official account of Tether for ban evasion. Moreover it is not an account banned it is a person behind it banned so Tether is forever banned from using this forum. Moreover we find somehow all people who worked for Tether during that time (at least all who worked with that account after ban evader) and we ban also them because they worked in an offending account, and also ban them forever.

You know, maybe it is how all the things are really go on, but if so it looks so wrong! Right because the person is banned from the forum and not an account.

And after all we ask, why projects decide to represent themselves on the forum much less frequently than previously. And really, why?

[decodx]

That does not mean I have to agree with your interpretation.

My interpretation doesn't require your agreement to be valid. Bitcointalk.org strives to embrace a free-speech-maximalist approach, and that's its charm - everyone has the right to be delightfully wrong!

The ban evasion rule only make sense for accounts that is in use for personal reason - when it's personal accounts.

Nope. For that to apply, moderators would have to go through the entire account history and evaluate each individual post to see if it was made for personal or business reasons. Obviously, that would be impossible.

Well, okay, let's imagine for instance that Tether comes to the forum and opens its topic to share news and answer questions. They hire one representative after another and this goes on for some time.
<...>

For this very reason, adopting such an approach to manage business presence on the forum is flawed. Right now, the forum platform doesn't have the option to create official business profiles like some other platforms do, for example Facebook. So, each account is tied to one person and should ideally be used by just that person. But that doesn't mean businesses can't have more than one representative or staff member on the forum. Each of them can maintain their own accounts and contribute to official threads or answer questions. If one of them gets banned for breaking the rules, the rest are in the clear, and the business presence remains intact.

[jokers10]

For this very reason, adopting such an approach to manage business presence on the forum is flawed. Right now, the forum platform doesn't have the option to create official business profiles like some other platforms do, for example Facebook. So, each account is tied to one person and should ideally be used by just that person. But that doesn't mean businesses can't have more than one representative or staff member on the forum. Each of them can maintain their own accounts and contribute to official threads or answer questions. If one of them gets banned for breaking the rules, the rest are in the clear, and the business presence remains intact.

I know at least one reason why having an additional account for each new representative is not so good idea: you lose an opportunity of editing the first post and so you need to leave it as is even if there are some important updates or to open a new topic for each representative even if they will change each month.

Now back to actual topic. I'm already confused about the exact name of the project in which naim027 worked, Cratoon or Paradice, doesn't matter. If he never said that, we'd never know who was behind the scenes.

So we have two opportunities: or the mentioned project is a part of the group of naim027 and it would be good to prove that. Or he just framed them revealing information about his job. In the second case I don't think it is fair to punish a project.

[LoyceV]

Well, okay, let's imagine for instance that Tether comes to the forum and opens its topic to share news and answer questions. They hire one representative after another and this goes on for some time. Then it's revealed anyhow that one of those guys they hired was a ban evader during he worked for Tether as their representative.

That's the opposite case, and I guess it can be handled on a per-case basis. What Royse777 was suggesting is that a banned user can continue posting using Tether's account. I don't think that's allowed.
Or maybe Tether in this case should just be held liable for their employees' spam, and be banned forever. I wouldn't miss them.

[JollyGood]

I can understand it most probably would be account strength in the hope of getting more merits for when he took the account to Legendary but why would he do it now when he is far from that goal?

I am not sure why that surprises you so much, that someone who is far away from Legendary rank (activity wise) wants to reach that 1k merit mark asap, or that he wants to keep farming merit. I mean, we all know more merit earned in 120 days often means better signature campaign so its only natural for account farmer to keep on farming merit in every possble way he can, and he became pretty decent at that. 

The Whirlwind signature campaign pays $125 with avatar for Snr Members and it moves to $150 for Legendary therefore I overlooked the crucial part. No doubt it would probably be the driving factor in this game of building up as many accounts as possible to be farmed to be used for either signature campaigns or for nefarious purposes.

Hello.
I am Seva from Paradice.in
Naim sent me a DM asking me to say something here.
I can only say that Naim and John worked for Paradice.in
John resigned on 26th March 2021. While Naim worked with us till 5th May 2023.
Both handled our BitcoinTalk profile. John handled our profile from 2020 to 2021, and Naim handled it from 2021 to 2023.
Naim asked me at least to say that they worked for us. Yes, they worked for us, and we never suspected they could be the same person. During their working time, they worked at different times while our support agents tried not to overlap.

A timely intervention from you therefore thank you for doing it (even if it was at the request of naim027) but all you have added by your own volition is that as far as you are concerned naim027 and John Abraham could effectively be the same person.

To clarify some things, John has been working with us since 2020 and resigned on March 2021. Naim worked for us from 2020 to 2023, and we had to remove him.

While we don't want to reveal anyone's nationality, John Speaks the native local languages of mine and the CEO.

John was getting more than 3x Salary than Naim when he resigned. It's not a good business for someone to leave the high-salary job and continue doing the same job for a 3x low salary. I don't think John could be Naim.

I have no idea if Naim was banned and if he has multiple accounts. I asked him today, and he said yes, he has. I am not an expert on Bitcointalk. We hire workers for their job. We don't know their personal life. This is non of our business being a crypto casino.

I am here on request of Naim. I am not here to prove anything. I just gave my statement, and it's official. If you don't believe me, I am sorry. I don't have time to convince anyone.

Another timely intervention from you once again at the request of naim027. In your opinion naim027 and John Abraham are not alt-accounts, we read it.

In theory: If anyone ask me to recommend Nain027 if he add me on his CV for reference then I don't think I am going to tell them anything negative as he worked very well in my business. I have no complain for the job he does for my service.

Oof. This guy obviously has no problem lying to anybody at any given time -- I'd think that would weigh on your decision to act as a reference for him. What would happen in the case that you vouched for him and then he went on to screw over a future employer?

The way naim027 and his alt-accounts have been operating in the forum, it seems at some point highly probable (if not inevitable) naim027 and his alt-accounts will do something like that but stranger things have happened.

Funny how this turned out to be somewhat prophetic:

I will create 100 more accounts as soon as I can.

I am certain he has more accounts currently at work but he'll be a bit more clever in masking them from hereon out.

Now that it is there in pixels on screen who can deny he ever said it? Having said that he is a compulsive liar and chief manipulator therefore would naim027 really stop at 100 alt-accounts or was he bluffing and would happily stop at 5,10 or 15?

[John Abraham]

So you are telling us that you don't know Bengali? Interesting. Where did you get this screenshot from?
I'm no expert, but it looks Bengali to me.

In which sense does it look like this is a screenshot? It might be. But I don't know if this is a screenshot. I don't remember the page/group name, but I found it from a Facebook group/page.

I already explained this. I sold my BTC for Paypal.

That's all I heard from my friend. I don't use PayPal.

https://ninjastic.space/post/61818297

So, You are telling me; If I said I don't use Payoneer in the past, I should not use that for the rest of my life. Isn't it?

No. I'm telling you that you claimed not to have PayPal AFTER your alleged transaction with naim027. Which means you lied in at least one of your two statements.

You are twisting it. I believe you understand the difference between "Don't have PayPal and Don't use PayPal". I don't use PayPal Regularly. I use it for some special needs!

...So, I just try to think logically and with a positive mindset....

Or, for example, he claims to have sent a portion of the earnings from signature campaigns to his personal Binance account, but he has not shown a single transaction of this kind on the blockchain. If there's nothing to hide, why not share ALL the evidence?

I feel like you wrote it with a positive mindset. I won't mind sharing something with you personally. Expect my dm after posting this.

It's funny how people confess to crimes and don't realize it. Not exactly a crime but a clear violation of the rules. I mean, when naim027 was banned for plagiarism, not only ban evaded with his alts AnotherAlt, Crypt0S0ul, also with Paradice.in account Cratoon.

I don't know if I have answered you in any of my posts yet. But I saw the tag you left on Paradice's official representative account. What makes you think your tag correctly uses the feedback system? The account has been in Naim's and Seva's control since I left Paradice in 2021. Paradice management is not active in this forum. Moreover, Seva said he had no idea if Naim was banned from the forum. So, ask yourself if your tag is justified or not.

Hi, naim027, do you want us to believe that you only managed that account up to a month ago?

Do you really think an Entire business platform will try to defend their ex-staff unless they just state the truth? Do you think a platform would risk its reputation lying in the forum? They have paid $7000 to a faucet abuser to regain their reputation. Yet you are trying to say a platform is lying in the forum to defend their ex-staff?

Since you already confirmed the suspected alt accounts have had access to this account in the past, who's to say they're not behind it now?

I don't think they check the replies. I would ask; does this forum account still always stay logged in after changing the password? I don't know. I haven't tried this in my account. I am surprised how forum members still raise their fingers after a business's official statement. Yet, you guys suspect a business for an Individual person who left their platform.

[Poker Player]

Blah, blah, blah.

This is my answer:

[Timelord2067]

Naim027 and I worked together for a long time, from 2020 to mid-2021, for a casino. I know him as Sil3ntS0ul. From our long working period together, we have had a good relationship with each other.

No one appears to have searched for Sil3ntS0ul so here goes:

https://ninjastic.space/search?content=Sil3ntS0ul

Congratulations to the Winners of the Regatta!🏆⛵️🍾

1 $21,80 HIKO
2 $21,80 marina1386
3 $19,08 Feriyandi
4️⃣ $19,08 Tinavu
5️⃣ $19,08 Sil3ntS0ul
6️⃣ $16,35 ACTPOHABT
7️⃣ $16,35 Nasrin
8️⃣ $16,35 xxx555
9️⃣ $13,63 petya
🔟 $13,63 aloxa
And 10 more winners! 🏆🏆🏆

Congratulations to the Winners of our 8th Regatta!🏆⛵️🍾

1 $12,93 Zuzu
2 $12,93 Laim83
3 $11,32 Salut
4 $11,32 marina1386
5 $11,32 lulya
6 $9,70 AndreiMironov
7 $9,70 Aleksandris
8 $9,70 Galusik
9 $8,08 Sil3ntS0ul
10 $8,08 ravi859[/size]

And 10 more winners! 🏆🏆🏆

There's no rhyme nore reason why that specific name is used, however, the OP / UID that makes the post is Cratoon (the OP of the thread).

The thread ( ✅ Paradice.in | 🍀 Provably Fair 🎲 | Rain☔| 30 sec Faucet | 1% House Edge ) is Merited by naim027 (2) a full two years *after* the thread was created.


Cratoon [BPIP]



John Abraham [BPIP]  



changes their password 48 hours after Cratoon

JollyGood, I think you are overreacting. I don't think I did not give you enough evidence. You seem too quick to tag my account without even investigating the information I left for the questions you asked.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5285347.msg55483764#msg55483764
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5276629.msg55216923#msg55216923

This was me when I was working with the company. I feel lucky that I used my name a couple of times while I was handling their representative account. Feel free to ask them at the time when, I (John) and Sil3ntS0ul worked there. After this response, I will not deal with you anymore. The community will judge your negative feedback.

More clearly, cratoon account represents paradice and I was in charge of the account when I worked for them from 2020 to mid-2021

Miraculously, cratoon has showered you with merits *after* your no longer controlled the account as observed by decodx in this post.


Funny how John Abraham's only DT distrust is of me:

Trust list for: John Abraham (Trust: neutral) (538 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2023-06-10_Sat_05.07h)
Back to index

John Abraham Trusts these users' judgement:
1. NEW philipma1957 (Trust: +24 / =0 / -0) (4793 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
2. NEW Royse777 (Trust: +17 / =6 / -2) (2595 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
3. LoyceV (Trust: +32 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (60) 13331 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
4. NEW The Sceptical Chymist (Trust: +29 / =3 / -0) (5315 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
5. BitcoinGirl.Club (Trust: +1 / =3 / -0) (1445 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
6. NEW Hhampuz (Trust: +116 / =3 / -0) (4727 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
7. NEW hugeblack (Trust: +4 / =0 / -0) (2757 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)
8. coinlocket$ (Trust: +9 / =0 / -0) (DT1! (17) 1498 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

John Abraham Distrusts these users' judgement:
1. NEW ~Timelord2067 (Trust: +14 / =11 / -0) (1081 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

John Abraham's judgement is Trusted by:
-

~John Abraham's judgement is Distrusted by:
-

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.
Get your own Trust list in BBCode at loyce.club/trust.

Code:

~John Abraham
~Cratoon

https://loyce.club/trust/2022-11-12_Sat_05.07h/1695987.html

Trust list for: Cratoon (Trust: neutral) (100 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2022-11-12_Sat_05.07h)
Back to index

Cratoon Trusts these users' judgement:
1. Removed naim027 (Trust: +0 / =2 / -11) (523 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Cratoon Distrusts these users' judgement:
-

Cratoon's judgement is Trusted by:
-

~Cratoon's judgement is Distrusted by:
-

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.
Get your own Trust list in BBCode at loyce.club/trust.

Hmm... funny that...

[The Sceptical Chymist]

The ban evasion rule only make sense for accounts that is in use for personal reason - when it's personal accounts.

Nope. For that to apply, moderators would have to go through the entire account history and evaluate each individual post to see if it was made for personal or business reasons. Obviously, that would be impossible.

Mmm.  That argument of personal vs. business accounts befuddles me completely, as I've never seen any such interpretation of the rule regarding ban evasion being presented before--and likely for good reason, too.  Unless I'm reading things wrong, it is always the person behind the banned account who is banned, and thus any accounts under that person's control are also banned regardless of what the accounts are used for. 

If I'm not mistaken, I've seen campaign/bounty managers receive temp bans and other such individuals who have urgent forum business to attend to on a regular basis, and there was never any question that an alt account could NOT be created in order to deal with that business.  I recall pleas to the mods to lift such bans, as whoever those members were couldn't communicate with the people they needed to (it was a long time ago).

I know Royse777 had a good relationship with naim027 and probably still does, but the rest of us can't view the latter through the former's eyes.  Homeboy naim027's actions and words made in public are all we can go by, and it does seem like he's probably got a stable of alt accounts that have yet to be sniffed out.  Luckily the forum detectives can be as persistent and focused as an Adderall-sniffing, crack smoking fiend who can only pay extremely close attention to one thing, i.e., one or more of them is gonna be laser-focused on finding those alt accounts.  And they will, I've no doubt.

[Mahdirakib]

I don't want to engage with forum users personal issues with each others.

I assume it is 'naim027' who has told you that this topic has been created for personal issues. A few more forum members have also believed it as the way naim027 tried to tell the story in 'Mahdirakib Insight' thread. It is his (naim027) poor mentality that he thinks I created this thread for personal issue. But believe it or not, I don't have any personal issue with him.

Mahdirakib, I've seen your previous posts related to Naim027's exposure. I respect that you keep catching him; maybe you have better reasons for spying on him.

I think it is necessary to give the answer of this now. I was trying to find the connection between 'naim027' and Crypt0S0ul after watching this post of 'morvillz7z'. Initially I couldn't find any valid connection between those accounts as I was only checking his name style (Dic3L0v3r, Crypt0S0ul, Sil3ntS0ul). He was using '0' instead of 'o' in the name of those accounts. I had sent a PM to 'LoyceV' by including those information. Then I found a real connection between 'AnotherAlt' and 'Dic3L0v3r' when I checked the addresses.

I wasn't checking anything about naim027 after that. And I had no reason to spy on 'John Abraham'. But I was a bit curious after reading this post of John Abraham in gambling section.

As I said earlier, I remember I saw Mahdirakib and Panjul07 in the Betcoin Competition thread. I remember I checked the contest result for a few weeks. Most of the time I saw the winner was Panjul07 and Mahdirakib.

I'm highly active in the gambling board, but I wasn't familiar with the name 'John Abraham' when I participated in those contests. I started to investigate on 'John Abraham' account by being curious. At first, I checked his post history and noticed he wasn't active in the forum when we (Panjul07 and me) were participating on those contests regularly. Then I started to check the transaction of 'John Abraham' Bitcoin address and found the connection with 'naim027' Bitcoin address.

I had also sent an email to whirlwind.money support by requesting the information of the forum member who was sending Bitcoin to 'naim027' address. But they haven't replied to my email (email screenshot). Finally I created this topic so that the forum members can find out the more connections between 'naim027' and 'John Abraham' account. Some forum members have posted enough evidence in this thread, but 'John Abraham' (I mean naim027) is still trying to deny it by telling lies and with baseless replies.

~snip~

'Sil3ntS0ul' is telegram display name of 'naim027'.

[LoyceV]

I am surprised how forum members still raise their fingers after a business's official statement.

An "official statement" from someone without credibility has no value.

Trust list for: Cratoon (Trust: neutral) (100 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP) (created 2022-11-12_Sat_05.07h)
Back to index

Cratoon Trusts these users' judgement:
1. Removed naim027 (Trust: +0 / =2 / -11) (523 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Cratoon Distrusts these users' judgement:
-

Cratoon's judgement is Trusted by:
-

~Cratoon's judgement is Distrusted by:
-

Source: LoyceV's Trust list viewer.
Get your own Trust list in BBCode at loyce.club/trust.

Hmm... funny that...

I'm more interested in when he added the account: February 2022. Cratoon just posted that "Naim" handled the "Cratoon" account back then:

John resigned on 26th March 2021. While Naim worked with us till 5th May 2023.
Both handled our BitcoinTalk profile. John handled our profile from 2020 to 2021, and Naim handled it from 2021 to 2023.

So he included his own account on Cratoon's Trust list. That's sockpuppet voting for DT1, even though his account was nowhere near DT1.

[Timelord2067]

Naim027 added Mahdirakib that same week:

https://loyce.club/trust/2022-02-19_Sat_05.07h/1187984.html

naim027 Trusts these users' judgement

9. NEW Mahdirakib (Trust: neutral) (272 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Naim027's judgement is Trusted by:
1. NEW Cratoon (Trust: awaiting update) (17 Merit earned) (Trust list) (BPIP)

Too many coincidences...


*Edit*

week 161 - (the week prior) naim027 adds ~90 UID's to their distrust list taking their DT distrust list to exactly 100.

I believe naim027 then set about a slow build of DT votes to get themself to DT 1 by layering votes to eventually get themselves to ten votes without drawing attention to themselves

[Mahdirakib]

Too many coincidences...

You may find it as coincidence, but naim027 had removed me from his trust list after a few weeks. Where he was in the trust list of 'Cratoon' until he (naim027) lost his reputation. Not to mention, 'Cratoon' account was belongs to 'naim027' during then.

Both handled our BitcoinTalk profile. John handled our profile from 2020 to 2021, and Naim handled it from 2021 to 2023.

'naim027' stopped trusting himself from 'Cratoon' account after receiving a lot of negative feedback . Maybe the account still belongs to naim027. He was using his trust list as the way he needed it to get the attention of the DT members.

[JollyGood]

Blah, blah, blah.

This is my answer:

That is a good answer considering the circumstances

I know Royse777 had a good relationship with naim027 and probably still does, but the rest of us can't view the latter through the former's eyes.  Homeboy naim027's actions and words made in public are all we can go by, and it does seem like he's probably got a stable of alt accounts that have yet to be sniffed out.  Luckily the forum detectives can be as persistent and focused as an Adderall-sniffing, crack smoking fiend who can only pay extremely close attention to one thing, i.e., one or more of them is gonna be laser-focused on finding those alt accounts.  And they will, I've no doubt.

From time to time some alt-account or another belonging to naim027 will eventually be found out and tagged, you are right about that. Whatever the real relationship between them it does not interest many of us here, they both can trust each other as much as they want but most of distrust one because of his compulsive lying and farmed alt-accounts while the other one has outgrown his ego and shown levels of increasing narcissism as he began managing multiple signature campaigns.

Personally, I trust neither of them.

[SamReomo]

Anyway are we talking about John Abraham ≈ naim027 or Cratoon ≈ John Abraham ≈ naim027 or Royse777 ≈ Cratoon ≈ John Abraham ≈ naim027 now?

I don't know about niam027 or the others in the list except Royse. Royse is one of the best people I ever met on the forum, and you're somehow trying to say that he's somehow an alt of those people. I totally disagree with your statement and found it totally useless. Royse is a very honest campaign manager and I have worked with him on many campaigns, and I can vouch for his honesty as a campaign manager. He does his job with complete transparency and has been playing his role as one of the best campaign managers for the forum.

You mean that when he was banned, apart from working for CasinoCritique he was also working for you?

Even if someone is banned on the forum that person can work in a team as a freelancer and no rules say that a person who is banned on this forum could not work for someone outside the forum. If I'm not wrong then a banned user can't work on this forum from his account or from an alt-account, and he/she can work with others without any problem if the task is outside the forum.

Like Royse already said that the guy is a member of his campaign management team and his work is to manage spreadsheets of the campaigns. There isn't any problem if someone is doing that, and it's Royse honestly and generous nature that he shared the thing with forum members. He could have hide the thing like other people do, but he said the truth which only few people who are transparent can say without any fear. If someone is not wrong then that person doesn't have any fear to tell a truth.

I'm pretty sure that Royse isn't favoring anyone and is telling the truth only, but it's a fact that most of the times the people who tell the truth face some type of criticism and hatred. And, I would also request the members on the thread to not have grudges with each other.