ILuckyGuyI is part of an alt farm that has been cheating contests for years

[theymos]

Therefore, it's normal for the IP address to be the same.

It's not normal for IPv6 addresses to be the same with a VPN, typically. And you shift ISPs in the same patterns as ILuckyGuyI.

What about Spack17?

Full IP logs only go back 6 months, so analysis of that account (which hasn't posted much recently) is more difficult. I'm not willing to make a public statement one way or the other on that one.

[jahead]

And which country did you select to obfuscate your location when using Opera?
[...]

The normal Version can only choose region like Europe, not country.  

[...]
Bitcointalk is banned in Türkiye, but you have the option of using a VPN. Therefore, it's normal for the IP address to be the same.

The written words in this thread are honestly really hard to read...

Imagine: All six users from the same country would randomly need to use the exact same VPN service first. And even then, they could only select the "Europe" region and would all have to be routed through THE one exact same country and THE exact same server in all of Europe by sheer luck. Bullshit.  
Even if you can pick a specific country with the Pro version, load balancing inside that country will still route you through different randomly chosen servers.

[Sing In A Band]

Which VPN are you using?

Opera VPN and goodbyedpi

from deepseek:

Opera VPN: Shared IPv4 Exit, but Different IPv6

Opera’s built-in "VPN" is actually a proxy server. It hides your real IP address, so the forum sees the proxy server's IP instead.

    IPv4 is shared: All users connecting to the same Opera VPN server will share the same public IPv4 address. Since Opera has a limited number of servers, thousands of users might route through the same exit node.

    IPv6 is handled differently: Opera VPN often routes IPv4 and IPv6 traffic through different servers or IP pools. Therefore, even if two users share the same IPv4 address, their IPv6 addresses are highly likely to be different, because they are assigned from separate server clusters or separate IP blocks.

GoodbyeDPI is not a VPN or a proxy. It is a DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) bypass tool.

    It does NOT hide or change your IP: It only modifies packet headers to bypass censorship and network blocks. It does not encrypt your traffic or route it through a remote server.

[CLS63]

Therefore, it's normal for the IP address to be the same.

It's not normal for IPv6 addresses to be the same with a VPN, typically. And you shift ISPs in the same patterns as ILuckyGuyI.

Because the VPN also changes the addresses, and those addresses are not Turkish. Examine it in detail and you'll definitely find something that sets me apart from the others.

[joker_josue]

Because the VPN also changes the addresses, and those addresses are not Turkish. Examine it in detail and you'll definitely find something that sets me apart from the others.

The IPv6 issue, by itself, may not seem conclusive. But the admin has access to more details.

That's why I highlight the other point raised by theymos:

It's not normal for IPv6 addresses to be the same with a VPN, typically. And you shift ISPs in the same patterns as ILuckyGuyI.

If this happens repeatedly, it seems to me a far more significant coincidence.

[CLS63]

Because the VPN also changes the addresses, and those addresses are not Turkish. Examine it in detail and you'll definitely find something that sets me apart from the others.

The IPv6 issue, by itself, may not seem conclusive. But the admin has access to more details.

That's why I highlight the other point raised by theymos:

It's not normal for IPv6 addresses to be the same with a VPN, typically. And you shift ISPs in the same patterns as ILuckyGuyI.

If this happens repeatedly, it seems to me a far more significant coincidence.

All my traffic is routed through a VPN. When you connect to a VPN node, every user on that server shares the exact same public IPv6 exit addres that’s just standard VPN routing. The 'ISP shifts' you're seeing are actually the VPN's hosting data centers . Because most VPN apps automatically connect to the fastest/optimal server, users in the same region get routed through the exact same sequence of servers. The matching IPs and network patterns are simply how the VPN functions, not proof that we're the same person. There are few addresses because I'm using the free version.

[DireWolfM14]

Are we talking about trust lists or trust ratings here? Because he's not on my trust list and based on his previous behavior he did deserve our trust ratings.
Gambling community deals with big sidebets on a yearly/monthly basis and CLS63 paid all of these for years. Then again, so did Slissy until he didn't.

As far as I understand, that's how the Trust system works, right? He was trusted and now he won't be anymore.

I'm talking about the trust list, not ratings (reviews.)  Having had a good experience with a member justifies a good review, but shouldn't automatically result in including him into your trust list.  The reviews that member leaves for others should be the criteria for inclusion.  His review left for others should be scrutinized for accuracy and consistency for him to be selected for inclusion into a DT1 member's trust list.  I.e. showing good judgement, not just trustworthy behavior.

There's one account that's accused among the many here that hasn't left a single review, yet that account is DT2 by way of inclusion.  I don't want to call out any DT1 member here since it's really off topic.  But, this topic has exposed that there is a problem among the gambling community that won't go overlooked for long if this continues.

[joker_josue]

All my traffic is routed through a VPN. When you connect to a VPN node, every user on that server shares the exact same public IPv6 exit addres that’s just standard VPN routing. The 'ISP shifts' you're seeing are actually the VPN's hosting data centers . Because most VPN apps automatically connect to the fastest/optimal server, users in the same region get routed through the exact same sequence of servers. The matching IPs and network patterns are simply how the VPN functions, not proof that we're the same person. There are few addresses because I'm using the free version.

I believe most of us know how VPNs work, and you are correct in your technical explanation.

The point isn't just that they share the same IPv6 address. When theymos says you "switch ISPs following the same patterns," it indicates that they may be analyzing the history of both accounts and finding a pattern of coincidences, repeated over time.

A coincidence can be explained by the VPN, but a repeated pattern of coincidences becomes more difficult to justify in that way alone.

Furthermore, we must take into account that many other Turkish users (and not only) may need to use a VPN to access the forum. Many probably also use the free options. If this pattern were common among these users, it would be difficult for theymos to highlight something, as you did.

Either way, I'm only speaking based on the information that has been presented.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Yeah, well, I've seen enough.

CLS63 is following the same pattern we’ve seen many times before in these cases: continuing to cast doubt as the evidence against them mounts. theymos doesn’t usually make this kind of public statement about IPs. We have his statement, we have the blockchain evidence, and then there’s the other evidence that we might call 'circumstantial' but which, when added to the above, is significant.

If, with all of this, you can’t red-tag CLS63 because there’s a tiny doubt as to whether the stars aligned so that the IPv6 addresses would be the same, and the blockchain addresses were for payments for translations, etc., then you won’t be able to red-tag anyone because you can always cast a doubt.

[ABCbits]

Bitcointalk is banned in Türkiye, but you have the option of using a VPN. Therefore, it's normal for the IP address to be the same.

All my traffic is routed through a VPN. When you connect to a VPN node, every user on that server shares the exact same public IPv6 exit addres that’s just standard VPN routing.

The odds is very low, here's why.

1. Not everyone choose VPN as workaround. Other option such as proxy and Tor also exist.
2. Among people who use VPN, each of them may use different VPN service.
3. Among people who use same VPN service, each of them may choose different server/country. if the VPN server/country chosen automatically, the odds the application always choose same server/country with same IP can't be that high.

And since IPv6 is involved, it's worth to mention there are far more total IPv6 address (almost 2^128 unique address), compared with IPv4 address (almost 2^32 unique address).

[cryptofrka]

If, with all of this, you can’t red-tag CLS63 because there’s a tiny doubt as to whether the stars aligned so that the IPv6 addresses would be the same, and the blockchain addresses were for payments for translations, etc., then you won’t be able to red-tag anyone because you can always cast a doubt.

You can, you should if you think you need to and you did. Exactly how the system is supposed to work.

I for one have no idea how VPN works, some of us need a bit more time to analyze all the data provided. Especially when it concerns someone I consider close to me - at least on BTT.
If I make the wrong call I'll pay the price when people remove me from their Trust lists and the system will do what it is supposed to once again.

I surely won't red tag him, I never tagged any sig campaign abuser so won't start with him but I'll probably remove the positive trust rating.

[LoyceV]

Imagine: All six users from the same country would randomly need to use the exact same VPN service first. And even then, they could only select the "Europe" region and would all have to be routed through THE one exact same country and THE exact same server in all of Europe by sheer luck. Bullshit.  
Even if you can pick a specific country with the Pro version, load balancing inside that country will still route you through different randomly chosen servers.

Here's the explanation from a VPN provider:

Each VPN server has many users. For both IPv4 and IPv6 every user will be assigned one exit IP address on the server from which the user's traffic will be sent out to the internet. There are technical limitations to how many users can use the same exit address, which is why servers have a range of several exit addresses.

So even if they all use the exact same VPN provider with the exact same server location, it's still not very likely to get the same external IP-address.

When you connect to a VPN node, every user on that server shares the exact same public IPv6 exit addres that’s just standard VPN routing.

Nice try.

[hugeblack]

Because the VPN also changes the addresses, and those addresses are not Turkish. Examine it in detail and you'll definitely find something that sets me apart from the others.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and behaves like a duck, then it is a DUCK!!!!

I don't want to call out any DT1 member here since it's really off topic.  But, this topic has exposed that there is a problem among the gambling community that won't go overlooked for long if this continues.

It is good that the trust system represents a wider range of opinions, otherwise this user would not have received -1 trust.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

I surely won't red tag him, I never tagged any sig campaign abuser so won't start with him but I'll probably remove the positive trust rating.

I makes sense to leave your feedback, I think this is something LoyceV has said in these matters. There are cases of people who have received positive feedback on the forum but who, after a while, ended up being red-tagged. Leaving the previous positive tags provides a historical perspective on the account.

[joker_josue]

Imagine: All six users from the same country would randomly need to use the exact same VPN service first. And even then, they could only select the "Europe" region and would all have to be routed through THE one exact same country and THE exact same server in all of Europe by sheer luck. Bullshit.  
Even if you can pick a specific country with the Pro version, load balancing inside that country will still route you through different randomly chosen servers.

Here's the explanation from a VPN provider:

Each VPN server has many users. For both IPv4 and IPv6 every user will be assigned one exit IP address on the server from which the user's traffic will be sent out to the internet. There are technical limitations to how many users can use the same exit address, which is why servers have a range of several exit addresses.

So even if they all use the exact same VPN provider with the exact same server location, it's still not very likely to get the same external IP-address.

When you connect to a VPN node, every user on that server shares the exact same public IPv6 exit addres that’s just standard VPN routing.

Nice try.

That's it!

Perhaps this will help to understand how records can be viewed in server logs. Imagine looking at 4 different users and seeing the following:

Period	User A	User B	User C	User D
1	ISP1 / IP-A	ISP1 / IP-A	ISP3 / IP-X	ISP4 / IP-Y
2	ISP1 / IP-B	ISP1 / IP-B	ISP2 / IP-K	ISP2 / IP-K
3	ISP2 / IP-C	ISP2 / IP-C	ISP5 / IP-L	ISP1 / IP-M
4	ISP2 / IP-D	ISP2 / IP-D	ISP3 / IP-N	ISP2 / IP-D
5	ISP4 / IP-E	ISP4 / IP-E	ISP4 / IP-E	VPN1 / IP-Q
6	ISP4 / IP-F	ISP4 / IP-F	ISP2 / IP-R	ISP2 / IP-R

Looking at this table, what conclusions did you reach?
Now multiply the table by thousands of users, and we will continue to see users A and B, always with exactly the same pattern.

[JollyGood]

Unless I am missing something, it is easy to conclude that any paid participation in football competitions and side bets would have helped give the cover that were needed to be passed off as a genuine member of the forum (and that tactic has worked to a degree because some members from the Gambling board have supported you after the allegations surfaced).

In a situation such as this, a tag would be justified if rules were broken when entering competitions/contests/campaigns or if merit abuse or trust abuse took place. Having said that, if each account operates in a non-nefarious manner then I suppose that is within the forum rules and none of the associated accounts would deserve tags.

Your IP address defence is a complete waste of time and you know that post was your last stand.

I think we already know there are at least six accounts in the farm. Will you be honest and explain why you did it?

Because the VPN also changes the addresses, and those addresses are not Turkish. Examine it in detail and you'll definitely find something that sets me apart from the others.

[Rikafip]

Unless I am missing something, it is easy to conclude that any paid participation in football competitions and side bets would have helped give the cover that were needed to be passed off as a genuine member of the forum (and that tactic has worked to a degree because some members from the Gambling board have supported you after the allegations surfaced).

I don't think that's the reason why someone joins paid pools, to get cover in case shit hits the fan. Otherwise, we would have seen more cases like this. Simply put, paid pools offer a higher quality of conversation than the rest of the gambling board, and on top of that, you can even make some extra money while doing it (if you are successful of course). If you are active in gambling board and don't want to talk to shitposters, that's the place to be.

After all, as we have seen, it doesn't rally offer much (if any) protection in the end.

[JollyGood]

Maybe joining paid pools was something that was enjoyable for account farmers but it certainly did not hurt receiving support when some of the accounts were accused of nefarious conduct. Hopefully my comment was not misunderstood by members as I was not implying every paid participant in those threads and competitions is trying to use their payment as a shield.

The higher quality of conversation in paid competitions is definitely more desirable than having nothing more than signature spammers infesting sports threads therefore I can understand your point.

I don't think that's the reason why someone joins paid pools, to get cover in case shit hits the fan. Otherwise, we would have seen more cases like this. Simply put, paid pools offer a higher quality of conversation than the rest of the gambling board, and on top of that, you can even make some extra money while doing it (if you are successful of course). If you are active in gambling board and don't want to talk to shitposters, that's the place to be.

After all, as we have seen, it doesn't rally offer much (if any) protection in the end.

[xLays]

Are we talking about trust lists or trust ratings here? Because he's not on my trust list and based on his previous behavior he did deserve our trust ratings.
Gambling community deals with big sidebets on a yearly/monthly basis and CLS63 paid all of these for years. Then again, so did Slissy until he didn't.

As far as I understand, that's how the Trust system works, right? He was trusted and now he won't be anymore.

I'm talking about the trust list, not ratings (reviews.)  Having had a good experience with a member justifies a good review, but shouldn't automatically result in including him into your trust list.  The reviews that member leaves for others should be the criteria for inclusion.  His review left for others should be scrutinized for accuracy and consistency for him to be selected for inclusion into a DT1 member's trust list.  I.e. showing good judgement, not just trustworthy behavior.

There's one account that's accused among the many here that hasn't left a single review, yet that account is DT2 by way of inclusion.  I don't want to call out any DT1 member here since it's really off topic.  But, this topic has exposed that there is a problem among the gambling community that won't go overlooked for long if this continues.

I don't think this is really about being off topic. You're just being unusually careful about mentioning the username because you don't have the balls to say it directly. lol

And the irony is that you're talking about good judgment and blah blah while being too scared to even name the account you're referring to. If you believe there's legitimate problem with that DT1 member's inclusion, then just say who you're talking about and explain why.

But yeah, I guess there's no real need to mention the username. We all know you're talking about jpwr anyway. Just correct me if I'm wrong. ✌️

[DireWolfM14]

I don't think

Obviously.  

There's more than one person guilty, and those people know because I'm respectful enough to tell them what I think in private.

And if you know jeremypwr is one of them, why don't you have the balls to say his name the right way, so that he's tagged?