Deleted posts in the Hardware BFL Thread, Double Standards, and Hypocrisy

[Xian01]

 Why is it that when a lawyer gets doxed and complains in a Butterfly Labs thread, all the offending posts identifying him are deleted, and bans are threatened, but when Butterfly Labs management doxes it's customers for complaining about their poor business practices, that information is allowed to stay up indefinitely.

 When scammers are doxed, that information is allowed to stay.

 Furthermore, try posting Theymos' dox and see what happens.

 Why the hypocrisy and double standards ?

 Either doxing everyone is OK, or doxing nobody is OK.

 Where is the consistency ?

[dogie]

Furthermore, try posting Theymos' dox and see what happens.

I'm pretty sure we all know who Theymos is, its been mentioned many, many times.

[Xian01]

Furthermore, try posting Theymos' dox and see what happens.

I'm pretty sure we all know who Theymos is, its been mentioned many, many times.

You're missing the point, dude, but thank you for your useless post.

[gmaxwell]

(Xian01 tells me that this thread was created because of messages I removed in a thread about BFL)

I don't know and don't care about "dox".  I removed a ton of posts that have absolutely nothing, not even any claim, of having to do with BFL, that were basically making it impossible to find the one in ten posts that were actually about BFL.

For the abstract question ... harassing people is not okay, but there are limits to what can be done about it.

[Gleb Gamow]

(Xian01 tells me that this thread was created because of messages I removed in a thread about BFL)

I don't know and don't care about "dox".  I removed a ton of posts that have absolutely nothing, not even any claim, of having to do with BFL, that were basically making it impossible to find the one in ten posts that were actually about BFL.

For the abstract question ... harassing people is not okay, but there are limits to what can be done about it.

I sent you a PM, bud.

[Xian01]

I don't know and don't care about "dox".  I removed a ton of posts that have absolutely nothing, not even any claim, of having to do with BFL, that were basically making it impossible to find the one in ten posts that were actually about BFL.

You don't care about "dox", but "coincidentally" removed every post containing the specific information pertaining to his identity, effectively whitewashing his "bad behavior".

Yes, I understand that the BFL thread is a complete mess, but it IS relevant and having to do with Butterfly Labs when shills and antagonists are identified and their cloak of anonymity removed.

Would you not agree that perhaps you went a bit too far with the post deletions in this particular instance ?

Having the lawyer identified in that thread was relevant to the discussion, although the following 10 pages of BS were not.

Why not split it off into a Meta thread instead of whitewashing it ?

[sbogovac]

Why is it that when a lawyer gets doxed and complains in a Butterfly Labs thread, all the offending posts identifying him are deleted, and bans are threatened, but when Butterfly Labs management doxes it's customers for complaining about their poor business practices, that information is allowed to stay up indefinitely.[...]

Good question, I second it.

[sbogovac]

(Xian01 tells me that this thread was created because of messages I removed in a thread about BFL)

I don't know and don't care about "dox".  I removed a ton of posts that have absolutely nothing, not even any claim, of having to do with BFL, that were basically making it impossible to find the one in ten posts that were actually about BFL.

For the abstract question ... harassing people is not okay, but there are limits to what can be done about it.

A load of bull-menure! The guy was deliberaty derailing the topic and deserved whatever he got.

Further more: see above about double standards...

[sbogovac]

Bitcointalk is putting itself in a very bad light by the apparent conflict of interest and favouring BFL in this.

[gmaxwell]

You don't care about "dox", but "coincidentally" removed every post containing the specific information pertaining to his identity, effectively whitewashing his "bad behavior".

Because it had, as far as I can tell or anyone alleged, _NOTHING_ to do with BFL.

was relevant to the discussion, although the following 10 pages of BS were not.

How so? None of those posts of ten pages of animated chicken gifs and what not, appeared to make any claim to relevance.  "It's relevant because I harassed someone and had a fun time" is not an argument.

As far as I can tell 90% of this is intentional, controlled topic derailment.  Y'all should be more critical about who you believe is on "your" side and who's been paying them to do what, I would be very surprised if some of the "BFL critics" hadn't been paid off by BFL; their constant lack of ability to conduct themselves professionally only makes everyone whos critical of BFL look stupider by association and the constant noise prevents finding any actual information.

Regardless, keep to the freeking topic. I am tired of the bad behaviour and I am tired of people ignoring requests to cut it out.

[dogie]

Furthermore, try posting Theymos' dox and see what happens.

I'm pretty sure we all know who Theymos is, its been mentioned many, many times.

You're missing the point, dude, but thank you for your useless post.

I know what you're saying, I'm not arguing for or against you - I was just correcting an error for others who may not be aware.

[Xian01]

"It's relevant because I harassed someone and had a fun time" is not an argument.

You are essentially backing and supporting Josh Zerlan of Butterfly Lab's doxing of myself, Bick, and PL with this argument, and you are saying "That's relevant and acceptable" but a user being doxed for derailing a Butterfly Labs thread gets COMPLETELY whitewashed ?

Is this a correct read on your argument ?

Read: "The good guys/customers get punished, and the bad guys are allowed to continue with their bad behavior preying on their marks and derailing threads"

[gmaxwell]

You are essentially backing and supporting Josh Zerlan of Butterfly Lab's doxing of myself, Bick, and PL with this argument, and you are saying "That's relevant and acceptable" but a user being doxed for derailing a Butterfly Labs thread gets COMPLETELY whitewashed ?

Nope.

So your argument here is someone that has, as far as anyone can tell or has alleged, absolutely nothing to do with BFL being harassed with ten pages of nonsense posts is ontopic in a BFL thread because Josh-- a third party-- treated you like shit in the past?  Just making sure I'm clear about your line of thinking, because it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Xian01]

You are essentially backing and supporting Josh Zerlan of Butterfly Lab's doxing of myself, Bick, and PL with this argument, and you are saying "That's relevant and acceptable" but a user being doxed for derailing a Butterfly Labs thread gets COMPLETELY whitewashed ?

Nope.
So your argument here is someone that has, as far as anyone can tell or has alleged, absolutely nothing to do with BFL being harassed with ten pages of nonsense posts is ontopic in a BFL thread because Josh-- a third party-- treated you like shit in the past?  Just making sure I'm clear about your line of thinking, because it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

He was posting in a Butterfly Labs thread, and derailing, ergo, he had SOMETHING to do with Butterfly Labs, even if it was a passing interest in joining the discussion.

Would you not agree ?

Define harassment ? Would you not agree that taking pre-order monies, not delivering products for months on end, and then antagonizing their customer base on these forums with his legendary bad behavior constitutes harassment ? Economic violence even ?

Lawyer dude decided to poke the bear. He was doxed for his derailing in a BFL thread. He cried harassment when he was unmasked. You came in on a white horse to his rescue.

Is this an accurate read ?

I'm not clear on your line of thinking, and what you are trying to rationalize here.

EDIT: Also, how on God's-green-earth is this thread not considered harassment, and should be deleted by your own standards (Information is hacked, stolen, published for the sake of harassment and intimidation, and allowed to stay up)

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=325772.5

[gmaxwell]

He was posting in a Butterfly Labs thread, and derailing, ergo, he had SOMETHING to do with Butterfly Labs, even if it was a passing interest in joining the discussion.

Thanks for confirming.

[Xian01]

He was posting in a Butterfly Labs thread, and derailing, ergo, he had SOMETHING to do with Butterfly Labs, even if it was a passing interest in joining the discussion.

Thanks for confirming.

I do not understand your response.

Please elaborate.

[JorgeStolfi]

dear @gmaxwell, I agree that many of those deleted posts were rather pointless, and there was way too much re-re-quoting and re-re-posting of the same material.  However, many of them were actually about people and facts connected to BFL.  Unfortunatly, only "insiders" of that thread would understand, for example, that a post about "chickens" refers to Jody Drake, a BFL manager who raises chickens and posts pictures of a pet chicken.  And ditto for many other posts.  

Many BFL victims could have been spared of their losses if they had known about the criminal precedents and dubious business history of some BFL managers.  Some of the bitcoins that were mined by BFL with customer equipment may be in the hands of BFL staff and associates, such as their mysterious forum manager and the owners of certain mining pools.  Much material in that thread is about trying to uncover the identity, past, and improper actions of those people.

It is the right of customers to know the managers and key employees of a company that they are considering to order from -- or, worse, that has swindled them.  People who choose to be in such positions or be part of such scams, even passively, have no right to remain anonymous or to hide their past.

[gmaxwell]

It is the right of customers to know the managers and key employees of a company that they are considering to order from -- or, worse, that has swindled them.

I agree. But this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Cryptic pages of picture of chickens doesn't aid people in recovering their losses, ten pages about people who have nothing to do with BFL beyond having posted in that particular thread, do nothing to aid people recover their losses-- in fact, it does precisely (and I think, intentionally) the opposite.

[Xian01]

It is the right of customers to know the managers and key employees of a company that they are considering to order from -- or, worse, that has swindled them.

I agree. But this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Cryptic pages of picture of chickens doesn't aid people in recovering their losses, ten pages about people who have nothing to do with BFL beyond having posted in that particular thread, do nothing to aid people recover their losses-- in fact, it does precisely (and I think, intentionally) the opposite.

Thank you for avoiding the questions.

[VenusFlyTrap]

Bitcointalk is putting itself in a very bad light by the apparent conflict of interest and favouring BFL in this.

Yes. I smell BFL wind blowing in this direction. I can see Sonny Vleisides roasting chestnuts by the fire...excited.