ATTENTION, theymos! Does BitcoinTalk NOW have a threatening security issue!

[Gleb Gamow]

Granted, I'm not versed as to how or why disabling the uploading of avatars protects this forum from outside attacks, but will take your word for it that such is warranted.

But, unless I'm mistaken, allowing a Romanian, Alex Sovu, to interface with BCT's API to now have the ability to delete any posts automatically from his self-moderated thread is a grave concern.

I implore you to lock all self-moderated threads until this potentially disastrous issue is resolved. Likewise, I duly ask that the practice of users creating self-moderated threads cease immediately, for I believe that the threat to this forum's 373,267 members is real, and the compromising of their identities is severely at stake.

Regards, from your pal living ~142 miles south of you,

~Bruno Kucinskas

[1714992233]

1714992233

[1714992233]

1714992233

[FunnyHat43]

It is disclosed to everyone prior to posting that a thread is self moderated and that posts can be deleted by the creator of the thread. You can make a new thread that is not self-moderated if you want to prevent being moderated like this.

Also self-moderated threads tend to get more attention as they can help people scam, so a deleted post will likely lead to a scam accusation being opened.

[Pentax]

It is disclosed to everyone prior to posting that a thread is self moderated and that posts can be deleted by the creator of the thread. You can make a new thread that is not self-moderated if you want to prevent being moderated like this.

Also self-moderated threads tend to get more attention as they can help people scam, so a deleted post will likely lead to a scam accusation being opened.

True, but in the case of what is happening here, this user has created a bot to delete posts of people that have spoken out against their company.

there are plenty of scam accusations against Black Arrow who has acted in numerous unethical ways, including this means of attempting to delete factual information from its thread.

so, sure, the current rules allow it.  and people have taken what steps they can to operate within those rules also in response to the actions of this company.

the premise I think is that this user is abusing the hell out of those rules in a wrongful attempt to prevent people that may be looking for information on this company from seeing the actual information being provided by current customers.

the question is why would this level of automated censorship be allowed.  it's obviously BS, at a minimum, and borders on fraud, if not outright crosses that line, by redacting the truth being posted by people that have been screwed by this company, lied to by this company and had their money taken and not returned as promised by this company.

[coric]

How does the bot distinguish criticism of the company from praise? That would be very sophisticated code for a forum bot.

But surely "self-moderation" is useful to scammers, but scammers are tolerated by the forum administrators, they wouldn't remove abything just because it encourages them.

[Pentax]

How does the bot distinguish criticism of the company from praise? That would be very sophisticated code for a forum bot.

But surely "self-moderation" is useful to scammers, but scammers are tolerated by the forum administrators, they wouldn't remove abything just because it encourages them.

It's programmed to delete certain users posts blindly.

[DebitMe]

I support this movement and would even like to go a step further and have the blackarrow user and other known accounts banned from the forums.

I do understand that they have not violated any forum rules, but lets face it, they are on par with Butterfly Labs and are just some of the worst people to inhabit bitcoin.

Also, we can add trust spamming to their list of faults as you can see what they left under mine.  If they cannot back up the claim that I ordered an X-1 through them and that they refunded me (neither of which they can do), then it is an obvious abuse of the trust system.

Oh wait, is abuse of the trust system against forum rules?  I am unsure about this one, but they have done it with their trust post under my account.

[coric]

It's programmed to delete certain users posts blindly.

OK, that sounds easy enough. Thanks.

[ACCTseller]

It is disclosed to everyone prior to posting that a thread is self moderated and that posts can be deleted by the creator of the thread. You can make a new thread that is not self-moderated if you want to prevent being moderated like this.

Also self-moderated threads tend to get more attention as they can help people scam, so a deleted post will likely lead to a scam accusation being opened.

True, but in the case of what is happening here, this user has created a bot to delete posts of people that have spoken out against their company.

there are plenty of scam accusations against Black Arrow who has acted in numerous unethical ways, including this means of attempting to delete factual information from its thread.

so, sure, the current rules allow it.  and people have taken what steps they can to operate within those rules also in response to the actions of this company.

the premise I think is that this user is abusing the hell out of those rules in a wrongful attempt to prevent people that may be looking for information on this company from seeing the actual information being provided by current customers.

the question is why would this level of automated censorship be allowed.  it's obviously BS, at a minimum, and borders on fraud, if not outright crosses that line, by redacting the truth being posted by people that have been screwed by this company, lied to by this company and had their money taken and not returned as promised by this company.

if someone isn't going to go to the "trouble" to check scam accusations before doing business with a company then they probably won't read through a thread (that potentially has negative comments against the company).

I don't think it would be against the rules to create a second thread discussing the company that is unmoderated (un-self-moderated) if it is that important to have a thread discussing the company in the mining section.

[Pentax]

I support this movement and would even like to go a step further and have the blackarrow user and other known accounts banned from the forums.

I do understand that they have not violated any forum rules, but lets face it, they are on par with Butterfly Labs and are just some of the worst people to inhabit bitcoin.

Also, we can add trust spamming to their list of faults as you can see what they left under mine.  If they cannot back up the claim that I ordered an X-1 through them and that they refunded me (neither of which they can do), then it is an obvious abuse of the trust system.

Oh wait, is abuse of the trust system against forum rules?  I am unsure about this one, but they have done it with their trust post under my account.

and mine.  completely fallacious feedback/trust post which they outright claim in an online article they have no proof to support.  and of course they do not, because it is completely false, i.e., a bold-faced lie.

these people are liars and fraudsters that have been using this forum to deceive people into buying products through false promises and claims and continue to do so by trying to censor information to prevent a true picture of their activities being presented.  

if anyone deserves a boot in the ass to show them to the door it is these people.  they are bad for bitcoin and abuse the privileges of this forum to further their unscrupulous activities. 

[Pentax]

It is disclosed to everyone prior to posting that a thread is self moderated and that posts can be deleted by the creator of the thread. You can make a new thread that is not self-moderated if you want to prevent being moderated like this.

Also self-moderated threads tend to get more attention as they can help people scam, so a deleted post will likely lead to a scam accusation being opened.

True, but in the case of what is happening here, this user has created a bot to delete posts of people that have spoken out against their company.

there are plenty of scam accusations against Black Arrow who has acted in numerous unethical ways, including this means of attempting to delete factual information from its thread.

so, sure, the current rules allow it.  and people have taken what steps they can to operate within those rules also in response to the actions of this company.

the premise I think is that this user is abusing the hell out of those rules in a wrongful attempt to prevent people that may be looking for information on this company from seeing the actual information being provided by current customers.

the question is why would this level of automated censorship be allowed.  it's obviously BS, at a minimum, and borders on fraud, if not outright crosses that line, by redacting the truth being posted by people that have been screwed by this company, lied to by this company and had their money taken and not returned as promised by this company.

if someone isn't going to go to the "trouble" to check scam accusations before doing business with a company then they probably won't read through a thread (that potentially has negative comments against the company).

I don't think it would be against the rules to create a second thread discussing the company that is unmoderated (un-self-moderated) if it is that important to have a thread discussing the company in the mining section.

maybe they would and maybe they wouldn't.  Black Arrow seems to think there is enough reason to censor their thread. 

people have created other threads.

I do not think the question is whether or not people should do their due diligence or if there is the ability to create another thread. 

the question is whether a clearly unscrupulous practice, which would seem to have no other purpose than intentionally misleading potential consumers, should be allowed to continue.

[gweedo]

to interface with BCT's API

Bitcoin doesn't have an api, so he is scripting meaning that really nothing theymos can do to prevent this without changing how self-mod post work.

[jbrnt]

I do not like self-mod threads, but they are not a security issue. It is a censorship issue. Change the subject of your topic. Got me (and may be many others) worried.

[ACCTseller]

The forum has a policy to not moderate potential scams. As a result it is not the safest way to conduct business (the same can be said with Bitcoin in general due to the inability to reverse a transaction).

I agree that a moderated thread almost will always mean scam and I invest/spend as so. There are some, very limited instances when a self moderated thread makes sense (for example when you have a high visibility thread that someone could use to advertise their services).

[MrTeal]

I implore you to lock all self-moderated threads until this potentially disastrous issue is resolved. Likewise, I duly ask that the practice of users creating self-moderated threads cease immediately, for I believe that the threat to this forum's 373,267 members is real, and the compromising of their identities is severely at stake.

Regards, from your pal living ~142 miles south of you,

~Bruno Kucinskas

Can you explain what you mean by the compromising on their identities being at stake? It appears that he's just automated the process of deleting posts by certain users, unless there's a reason to believe the forum itself has been compromised.

[goozman96]

Black Arrow has left me frivolous trust feedback as well. I recently got a PM telling me that two of my posts were deleted from their thread. One of the posts was an old one telling PG/Gleb to not accuse black arrow of being a scam since it wasn't proven back then yet. I find it ironic that they'd delete that super old post.

[greenlion]

How does the bot distinguish criticism of the company from praise? That would be very sophisticated code for a forum bot.

But surely "self-moderation" is useful to scammers, but scammers are tolerated by the forum administrators, they wouldn't remove abything just because it encourages them.

It's programmed to delete certain users posts blindly.

The criteria for being one of those blacklisted usernames seems to be anyone who mentions the actual name of any individual associated with Black Arrow.

[saddambitcoin]

Self-moderated threads are needed to cut out the noise from trolls where intelligent discussion is paramount.

[Dare]

I do not like self-mod threads, but they are not a security issue. It is a censorship issue. Change the subject of your topic. Got me (and may be many others) worried.

Not only is it not a security issue, it's intended behavior. Black Arrow doesn't seem particularly legitimate from what I've heard, and their mass deletion of posts in their thread certainly isn't helping their image, but there's nothing wrong with the forum.

[Gleb Gamow]

Self-moderated threads are needed to cut out the noise from trolls where intelligent discussion is paramount.

How is that an honest entity is able to maintain a thread with very little discontent sans being self-moderate, yet most self-moderated threads turn out to be scams?

[opossum]

Self-moderated threads are needed to cut out the noise from trolls where intelligent discussion is paramount.

How is that an honest entity is able to maintain a thread with very little discontent sans being self-moderate, yet most self-moderated threads turn out to be scams?

Most self-moderated threads turn out to be scams because the scammer wants to be able to delete any posts from people who call them out on their scam. There are plenty of legit self moderated threads throughout the forum.

I do agree that some sections should really not allow self moderated threads, primarily the marketplace sections, as many people will only look in a seller's thread to get a good idea if someone is scamming (they will often not even look at their trust). If someone has a self moderated thread they could potentially scam multiple times, even after the scam is uncovered