deadsea33 has locked his own complaint thread without resolution

[JollyGood]

The current owner/operator of the deadsea33 account created a thread trying to get a neutral tag (placed by hugeblack) removed hugeblack made false accusations against me. but locked it.

After the drama within the now-locked thread brought him unexpected inspection of his deadsea33 account, he has locked the thread without providing an explanation and without even defending himself against accusations as well as against the strong evidence. Of the 39 posts made in that thread deadsea33 only posted twice (#1 and #3) before locking it.

The timeline speaks volumes:

8th July 2023:
- hugeblack leaves neutral trust: Looks like this account has been hacked/bought, deleted a lot of posts, suddenly starts distributing merits, and may have several alternatives in his trust history.
- deadsea33 creates the hugeblack made false accusations against me. thread and makes two posts in that thread.

12th July 2023:
- deadsea33 locks the thread

14th July 2023:
- deadsea33 makes another post but in the SINBAD.io MIXER July Bitcoin Price Prediction Challenge by placing a guess to the value of Bitcoin in the hope of pocketing some BTC.

16th July 2023:
- still silence from deadsea33 even though he logs in to the forum account regularly including today.

==========

In the 8 days from 8th July 2023 when he started the thread against hugeblack until today, deadsea33 made just one post and it was an attempt to try to predict Bitcoin price and he locked his own complaint thread without explanation. It seems highly likely deadsea33 is not the only account under his control and he has probably accepted he cannot use it in the way he hoped with signature campaigns therefore is milking it for what he can by posting in the price prediction thread while trying to keep his other accounts unconnected.

He created the thread hoping to get momentum from members behind him to pressure hugeblack in to removing his tag but it did not work therefore he locked the thread without challenging the alternative views. Looking at the manner in which deadsea33 has conducted himself it will be difficult (if not impossible) for any member here to defend his actions.

Maybe the current owner/operator of the deadsea33 account will use this thread to give an explanation.

[1714646678]

1714646678

[1714646678]

1714646678

[1714646678]

1714646678

[JeromeTash]

I wonder why he had to open a thread complaining about the false accusations only for him to go silent and lock the thread after members asking him to prove that he is the original owner of the account. I always think if someone is making a complaint or counteraccusation, they should be able to give proof or reasons to help members understand that indeed the feedback left on them is unjustified.

For example, signing a message from these addresses would be of help to him in this case.

17ckvmvSt8SPEy2DnjtGVpY8p5KK5B9f3c
1BdftzcoqrR6sAHRMTZoFcUnDvJDRgcZBP

Then i guess he shouldn't have a problem signing a message from any of the following donation bitcoin addresses that appeared on his profile at one point as per the archives

Donations for iXcoin development: BTC: 17ckvmvSt8SPEy2DnjtGVpY8p5KK5B9f3c

Donations for iXcoin development: BTC: 1BdftzcoqrR6sAHRMTZoFcUnDvJDRgcZBP

I also noticed he got accepted in the Yomix signature campaign earlier on, but once the discoveries and other account connections were made, he gave up on the campaign as well.

[Rikafip]

Maybe the current owner/operator of the deadsea33 account will use this thread to give an explanation.

If he wanted to continue the discussion he woulnd't lock the thread so I don't really expect him to show up here.

I wonder why he had to open a thread complaining about the false accusations only for him to go silent and lock the thread after members asking him to prove that he is the original owner of the account.

Imho no mystery there really: he didn't get the support he thought he will or he simply didn't think it through before opening complaint thread so once hard questions started showing up, he disappeared.

I always think if someone is making a complaint or counteraccusation, they should be able to give proof or reasons to help members understand that indeed the feedback left on them is unjustified.

Hah, reality is completely different as often those who complain about neutral tag end up getting negative, or even end up being connected to previously banned accounts.

[SmartGold01]

I think If I am not mistakenly I have came across the thread and also posted as well, from my observation I understand that the account is a bought account because there are two things possible; 1. Either he come and defend himself or herself or 2. He should have signed a message using a wallet that was used in a campaign for the last 3 years or last 2 years reason I said that is there may be some cases where he Lost all access to the first  address association to the account due to lack of understanding or not knowing how to safely secure his wallet details. This may be considered but haven not come to explain and show proof as the original owner has disqualified him of being the first holder of that account.
I guess by now he is roaming the forum with his alt.
But nottheless, what do you think would likely happened to account since he wasn't able to defend himself, should it be pama ban or give a tempo ban?

[examplens]

deadsea33 did the right thing when he closed his topic. He has already been tagged, I believe that is enough for his further participation in the forum (mainly in the part where he can earn some money, signatures, contests etc...). So any further discussion about his past is useless, as is this topic. I don't see why we should drag out this case further, nor the reason to start any drama about it. I mean, is it really worth discussing "why someone closed their topic"?
Apparently, he ^deadsea33 is not interested in that either.

[YOSHIE]

Maybe the current owner/operator of the deadsea33 account will use this thread to give an explanation.

I thought so too, we haven't seen any response from @deadsea33, after he posted the thread, I thought something was good or bad in responding to his self-made thread against @hugeblack.

But I'm a little doubtful for @deadsea33, responding to this thread, he should have been more free to defend himself in the thread he made himself responding to doubts from @hugeblack acute that it was hacked or bought.

Looks like, if @deadsea33 drops by here, maybe we'll see a long debate in your thread, @JollyGood, with some proof, if he has any.

[lovesmayfamilis]

deadsea33 did the right thing when he closed his topic. He has already been tagged, I believe that is enough for his further participation in the forum (mainly in the part where he can earn some money, signatures, contests etc...). So any further discussion about his past is useless, as is this topic. I don't see why we should drag out this case further, nor the reason to start any drama about it. I mean, is it really worth discussing "why someone closed their topic"?
Apparently, he ^deadsea33 is not interested in that either.

If you notice, it now also has a negative tag. It is with them that JollyGood tries to involve deadsea33 in explaining.
Although those who know JollyGood himself are well aware that no explanation will help to lose the red tag, moreover, in both cases he has no options. Therefore, managers can determine for themselves whether they need an account with a negative tag or not.

[deadsea33]

@JollyGood

Lol

12th July 2023:
- deadsea33 locks the thread

Thread is not locked by me.

[holydarkness]

@JollyGood

Lol

12th July 2023:
- deadsea33 locks the thread

Thread is not locked by me.

Regardless of who locked the topic, as you're here, can you perhaps clarify the issue and prove your statement as suggested by many on the other thread; by signing a message from your old wallet? JT had made a huge length of effort providing it for us, I think either one of them is OK.

[...]
For example, signing a message from these addresses would be of help to him in this case.

17ckvmvSt8SPEy2DnjtGVpY8p5KK5B9f3c
1BdftzcoqrR6sAHRMTZoFcUnDvJDRgcZBP

[...]

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

Regardless of who locked the topic, as you're here, can you perhaps clarify the issue and prove your statement as suggested by many on the other thread; by signing a message from your old wallet? JT had made a huge length of effort providing it for us, I think either one of them is OK.

[...]
For example, signing a message from these addresses would be of help to him in this case.

17ckvmvSt8SPEy2DnjtGVpY8p5KK5B9f3c
1BdftzcoqrR6sAHRMTZoFcUnDvJDRgcZBP

[...]

You are actually going far, because he/she definitely can't  sign a message using those wallets, because from my observation, it clearly show that account "Deadsea33" is  bought & in the hand of it's new buyer, because he is yet to give any valuable reason why a dormant account since 2018 just became active on the forum 5years later, with almost 90% of its posts which he/she made since 2013 deleted. Because who does that, if not only in a case of transfer of ownership, which "deadsea33" knows about it and the reason why he locked the previous thread.

[Igebotz]

He/she has accepted your assessment (tag) and moved on, and I doubt you'll hear from him/her again. It's clear he's moved on with his life....

He created the thread and has every right to lock it when due fit.

[holydarkness]

Regardless of who locked the topic, as you're here, can you perhaps clarify the issue and prove your statement as suggested by many on the other thread; by signing a message from your old wallet? JT had made a huge length of effort providing it for us, I think either one of them is OK.

[...]
For example, signing a message from these addresses would be of help to him in this case.

17ckvmvSt8SPEy2DnjtGVpY8p5KK5B9f3c
1BdftzcoqrR6sAHRMTZoFcUnDvJDRgcZBP

[...]

You are actually going far, because he/she definitely can't  sign a message using those wallets, because from my observation, it clearly show that account "Deadsea33" is  bought & in the hand of it's new buyer, because he is yet to give any valuable reason why a dormant account since 2018 just became active on the forum 5years later, with almost 90% of its posts which he/she made since 2013 deleted. Because who does that, if not only in a case of transfer of ownership, which "deadsea33" knows about it and the reason why he locked the previous thread.

LMAO. I actually tried my best to give him a benefits of doubt. Who knows, maybe his statement is true that he's not the one locking the thread and he was intending to post a signed message before it got locked for whatever reason. Well, this is his chance.

I have to say his window is rapidly closing, though. He's online by the time our posts were made, and he still gone silent.

[_BlackStar]

I have to say his window is rapidly closing, though. He's online by the time our posts were made, and he still gone silent.

He have posted something at here - but did not elaborate on the many things that were doubtful about him, but perhaps he was no longer interested in discussing them any further.

I'm not at all sure @deadsea33 can stand up for himself when he doesn't get a lot of support - so keeping quiet and ignoring the accusations might just keep him safe from the possibility of additional red tags from some DT. But if he really doesn't care about red tag and really wants to work things out and defend himself and his reputation - then it's possible to expect some explanation from him on this particular thread.

[yahoo62278]

With the signed message request in the other thread ignored combined with him posting in this thread but without a signed message, things do not look good for him. Sometimes it is better to not respond in threads brought up about you, but this is not 1 of those times.

[JollyGood]

I wonder why he had to open a thread complaining about the false accusations only for him to go silent and lock the thread after members asking him to prove that he is the original owner of the account. I always think if someone is making a complaint or counteraccusation, they should be able to give proof or reasons to help members understand that indeed the feedback left on them is unjustified.

I think he was confident enough that will all the merits he was trying to accumulate in his merit competition thread, he would have some backing from members to pressure hugeblack in to removing the neutral tag. I can think of no other explanation.

I also noticed he got accepted in the Yomix signature campaign earlier on, but once the discoveries and other account connections were made, he gave up on the campaign as well.

If he has other farmed accounts he will allow this one to slip away in to obscurity without much hassle because he will rely on his other accounts to bring in signature campaign earnings for him.

I wonder why he had to open a thread complaining about the false accusations only for him to go silent and lock the thread after members asking him to prove that he is the original owner of the account.

Imho no mystery there really: he didn't get the support he thought he will or he simply didn't think it through before opening complaint thread so once hard questions started showing up, he disappeared.

That was true but he ended up posting here and unlocking the original thread where he complained about hugeblack.

I always think if someone is making a complaint or counteraccusation, they should be able to give proof or reasons to help members understand that indeed the feedback left on them is unjustified.

Hah, reality is completely different as often those who complain about neutral tag end up getting negative, or even end up being connected to previously banned accounts.

It has happened several times, members complain about a neutral tag and inadvertently bring attention to themselves therefore others start investigating the account only to notice enough evidence to leave more neutral (or negative) feedback and exclude from trust too.

[Jawhead999]

Lol, I see he get red tagged by you, I've predicted it before.

I wouldn't be surprised if you will get negative tag.

Thread is not locked by me.

Then who lock the topic? the moderator? if the moderator lock your topic, why your thread is unlocked now?

According to this post, when the moderator lock the topic, the creator can't unlock it. So who was the one lock your topic? ghost? I don't buy your story, you must sign message from your old address.

After the moderator or administrator closes the topic, the creator of the topic can not unlock it. If the creator tries to unlock the topic, he will receive a message:

[JollyGood]

I guess by now he is roaming the forum with his alt.
But nottheless, what do you think would likely happened to account since he wasn't able to defend himself, should it be pama ban or give a tempo ban?

The moderators will not ban the deadsea33 account. He is probably (as you said) roaming the forum with other accounts and is probably doing so for hitting his signature campaign quota.

Maybe the current owner/operator of the deadsea33 account will use this thread to give an explanation.

I thought so too, we haven't seen any response from @deadsea33, after he posted the thread, I thought something was good or bad in responding to his self-made thread against @hugeblack.

But I'm a little doubtful for @deadsea33, responding to this thread, he should have been more free to defend himself in the thread he made himself responding to doubts from @hugeblack acute that it was hacked or bought.

Looks like, if @deadsea33 drops by here, maybe we'll see a long debate in your thread, @JollyGood, with some proof, if he has any.

I doubt he had any proof otherwise he would have presented it by now but it was the fact he gave up easily without trying to defend his actions that stood out. Instead of accepting the neutral tag from hugeblack he decided to try to get a movement behind him to pressure him in to removing the tag but as usual it did not work.

If you notice, it now also has a negative tag. It is with them that JollyGood tries to involve deadsea33 in explaining.
Although those who know JollyGood himself are well aware that no explanation will help to lose the red tag, moreover, in both cases he has no options. Therefore, managers can determine for themselves whether they need an account with a negative tag or not.

I removed the neutral tag and replaced it with a negative tag because the account is clearly no longer in control by the person that created it all those years ago. If he can present an argument to the contrary I will be happy to revise it.

[DaveF]

I just neg tagged that account too. JG hope you don't mind did a copy / paste of what you did.

Usually I don't do negatives this quickly or at all, or even get into this kind of thing as much as others but for some reason it just really seems off.

If deadsea33 comes back and proves otherwise I will remove it, but at this point I don't see that happening.

Don't know why this one just stands out in my mind unlike some others that are out there.

-Dave

[Majestic-milf]

 Sometimes, silence is not the best answer after all.  ..If he had at least signed the message, it would have settled a little of the doubt but his action just shows how guilty he might possibly be.One funny thing I've observed about these bought accounts is that they are often overlooked, except they do something worthy of being called out; like say they are accused of scamming or plagiarism or something.
 But most times, these users sometimes get a neutral feedback and go on to create threads, airing out their grievances about how they've been wronged but when the account is looked into, there's a lotta skeletons. And I be like " why bother creating these threads when you're not completely innocent?". Just my thought tho.

[JollyGood]

With the signed message request in the other thread ignored combined with him posting in this thread but without a signed message, things do not look good for him. Sometimes it is better to not respond in threads brought up about you, but this is not 1 of those times.

If he made a meaningful post here it would show he is determined to try to right a wrong that was done to him. Signing a message would be helpful but there would a suspicion related to the writing styles and with the previous owner/owners of the account and many would suspect the address would be part of the deal which saw him take ownership (unless the account was hacked).

Well, he was afforded every opportunity to clear his name and he refused, first by locking his own thread and then by posting sarcasm here.

LMAO. I actually tried my best to give him a benefits of doubt. Who knows, maybe his statement is true that he's not the one locking the thread and he was intending to post a signed message before it got locked for whatever reason. Well, this is his chance.

I have to say his window is rapidly closing, though. He's online by the time our posts were made, and he still gone silent.

That was generous of you but deadsea33 does not deserve the benefit of doubt now because that time passed over a week ago when he stopped posting in his own thread.

I'm not at all sure @deadsea33 can stand up for himself when he doesn't get a lot of support - so keeping quiet and ignoring the accusations might just keep him safe from the possibility of additional red tags from some DT. But if he really doesn't care about red tag and really wants to work things out and defend himself and his reputation - then it's possible to expect some explanation from him on this particular thread.

He probably has given up on trying to milk the account on signature campaigns after he unwittingly managed to get it noticed therefore he will not spend time on trying to defend it or seek pity because he knows it will be pointless. We do not know how many other accounts he operates and if they are enrolled in campaigns it means he will be occupied elsewhere.

I just neg tagged that account too. JG hope you don't mind did a copy / paste of what you did.

Usually I don't do negatives this quickly or at all, or even get into this kind of thing as much as others but for some reason it just really seems off.

If deadsea33 comes back and proves otherwise I will remove it, but at this point I don't see that happening.

No problem DaveF

Don't know why this one just stands out in my mind unlike some others that are out there.

Maybe this particular issue with deadsea33 must have had some sort of impact on you because you might have read something from this user in the past which made you suspicious of him and it stayed with you.

Some time ago I noticed the thread he created where he was willing to give merits through a competition and immediately thought this was someone trying to build their account but someone who had the trait of being familiar with the workings of the forum, therefore indicated to being part of a bigger account farming process. If I had investigated earlier I would have tagged the account sooner.