Topic: Abusing behaviours by nutildah and JollyGood (Read 794 times)

Do you have any suspicions as to who is behind the BTT_Temp_Acc? I think I know.

If it is not the OP then one thing is for sure, the pattern is very similar to another member.

As you stated, there are that many alt-accounts that it is difficult to remember them all but the pattern does stand out but you are right because if he used the same old tagged accounts nobody would have paid attention and may would have kept them on ignore. It seems easier to create an account, attack some members then go back in to hiding.

Man, check his ^BTT_Temp_Acc writing style, we have seen it many times. But he has already changed so many accounts that it is difficult to remember all of them. Register a new account to insult and try to make new dramas with DT members, if he had done it with one of the older accounts, no one would have paid attention.
I would not take him seriously in any further discussion.

The concrete part of the proof is rejected by the OP using his TheGreatPython account with the most pointless of excuses imaginable but he had to make at least one attempt to get the tags removed otherwise all of his efforts to build up the account would have been wasted. It is quite laughable to be honest.

I cannot speak for others but I have not had time to going through them to determine which tags are appropriate for them but I intend to tag accounts that deserve them, it all comes down to having enough time.

Wrong 

This is contradictory. There can be no abuse of trust feedback if it is used against scammers and cheaters. What you call abuse, most DT members consider a fair use of the trust system.

How about you stop being lazy and do your own research? This is the internet: anybody can say anything, and without proof or something to back it up, it means nothing.


Ah yes, the clause that launched a thousand shit stirring alt accounts. You took the liberty of rewording it a bit, but that's fine.

You're no Edward Snowden. You're not a whistleblower reporting on a wrongdoing that exposes the faults of the system. You're just stirring shit because you're mad I tagged one your other accounts. Have a fantastic day.

i guess suchmoon and i got this perfectly    

So what if he changed password ten times in few months?
I didn't notice any abusive behavior from him, and this has nothing to do with changing of account passwords.
With this post you are just going to motivate him to do more investigation and find more connections, so good luck

please explain why on the same day.because you were active on the topic but waited until nutildah to remove

you sound like you tagged based on nutildah comment while removing but never looked at the conversation happened for 3 weeks

all boiled down to a biased tag without analysing full story or a tag on request, right?

Only lixer and aralmus is active now.

lixer, Laosai and OP, all three have also claimed reward from Luckybit- https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4123350

Kinda curious, if all these accounts are connected why is only 1 tagged? If they are a cheater on 1 account, wouldn't that mean cheater on all? Assuming the proof posted is concrete evidence. I would invite all the other accounts to chime in.

You created an account specifically to post this so-called accusation of abuse? You are seriously deluded however I will entertain your BTT_Temp_Acc for a single post.

I tagged the TheGreatPython account because even though you he managed to either convince (or bore the hell out of) nutildah in to removing his neutral tag, I was convinced you he deserved it. After I left the original tag, you he sent a PM asking me to remove the tag. I stated I would revise it and I did. Had your the TheGreatPython account left matters as they were, you he would have continued building the account making use of the account farm.

Unfortunately for you him you he did not appreciate one word in my neutral feedback and the rest regarding your his account is history.

Yes, you should have been here a lot sooner but better late than never.

He thought he would create a thread that would give him sympathy leading to his neutral trust being removed but on the contrary it helped bring that part of his account farm to an abrupt end.

He was even challenging the connected payments still claiming innocence but looks as though he has given up on using the account now. He will be busy trying to build up his other accounts no doubt.

Oh damn, I was too late here!


He started with two neutrals and was supposed to walk away with 4 red tags?
I'm saying supposed to because it seems like he's not giving up yet, why can't people read the room, is it because they have an IQ below room temperature or what? 

So, he's got some 30+ accounts discovered, any bets on how many have not yet been linked? 40? 60?

first thing first, why this is a newbie account:
theymos once said this:

secondly, TheGreatPython must be a shit and i welcome all the red tags for scamming and lying.i do not have any second opinion on this



finally, why not we look into the subject of this topic? why we need to ignore that? just because nutildah found the scamming connections of OP?

why not nutildah and JollyGood take a chance to clear the doubts?

was nutildah a traded account? why password was changed 10 times in 2018?

why nutildah convinced to remove his tag from OP and why did not convince for 3 weeks.what finally changed to remove the tag?

why JollyGood started tagging on the same day and not before?



in my opinion, abuse is abuse even against a scammer.this leads me to post here

And why would exchange/casino send the change to one of customer deposit address? It could add bug or technical complexity, such as accidentally add more balance to user's account when in fact the user never make deposit. Besides, change address feature has been around for very long time and enabled by default even on Bitcoin-Qt. Here are some references link i found from quick search,
https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=Change&oldid=19017
https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/4617

They should all be tagged.

If they want to join a sig campaign it gives the CM some more info as to if they want them in their campaign.
If they are going to be buying / selling things then people dealing with them would want to know.

Now, I left a neg for TheGreatPython and gave them a ~ in my trust list. If I have time this week, I will probably go though the rest, but real life keeps getting in the way of forum time so who knows if I will ever get to doing that.

-Dave

It is a bit late under the circumstances but the OP did send a PM before he created this thread. The only reason he created it was because the original neutral feedback was revised to add the following: After being questioned about whether the "TheGreatPython" account was being controlled/operated by the original creator, he signed a message purporting to show ownership.

Thanks to nutildah and lovesmayfamilis whatever plans the OP had for the account have been thwarted.

Lol. Great thread.

Nutilda and Jollygood you two have once again amazed this community with your "investigation skills" and flushed out another scammer.

You are so shamelessly full of shit that its laughable. How you could have been around for this long and not have the first clue how bitcoin transactions work doesn't make any sense. Unless you're lying about everything, in which case, nobody should trust anything you have to say.

This is the problem with account buying: should all the accounts connected to this one get tagged or should they not, seeing as how two of them went on the be semi-decent contributors to the forum.

To be fair, "I cannot recall" is a legal defence in many places.   

You are missing the point here. It's not just about the change address. It's about the fact that you (or whoever was using that wallet at that time) used multiple input addresses, linked to different forum accounts, and combined them in the same transactions to send funds to addresses that are also part of the same wallet but used by other forum accounts. No exchange or casino, or any other custodial service for that matter, would do something like this.

And let's not forget that almost all of the related accounts were registered on the forum around the same time. That's another "coincidence" that's hard to ignore.

Honestly, you dug your own grave when you started this thread. Your best bet was to come clean and admit that you bought this account and have nothing to do with the previous owner. But you're too stubborn to do that. Instead, you're insisting that you're the original owner, which is just digging yourself a deeper hole. Given the connections between this account and other known scammers, cheaters and ban evaders, the negative tag is completely justified.

Are you sure about the availability of "new" change addy feature in all types of wallets by 2013?

Even in 2024, in most of the wallets, this feature is not getting enabled by default.

There is no such common behaviour; when "new change addy" option was not opted, then either one of the input will appear in output as well.

Only in rare cases, exchanges/casinos will able to find exact inputs for a required output+fees for a transaction. In most cases, a change addy is needed and when "new change addy" option was not enabled then one addy will appear in both input and output.

I thought we had seen the last of you using TheGreatPython account.

After all the effort you put in to get your original neutral tag removed only to have ended up with one from me, followed by one from suchmoon and the negative one from me too. What will you do next? I suspect you will focus on your undiscovered accounts and try to build them up because the tags on the TheGreatPython account will not be removed.

As for the addy excuse, that was probably the best you could do under the circumstances but you already knew it would not be taken seriously.

I swear to Satoshi the louder and more aggressive people are when making threads like this, the more scrutiny they bring on themselves--and almost inevitably, the members with shovels will dig up something nasty in the thread creator's past.  When nutildah dropped those address connections, I almost pissed my shorts.  That was a fantastic slap in the face to OP, so props to nutildah and his shovel.


*laughing with perverse glee*

Exchange, casino or other custodial service usually would consolidate Bitcoin from customer deposit address. In addition, they would include more address/UTXO to save some money on TX fee. But on TXID cf576aef0213fe1d54eb31d0810eae4d509a772fa4924aa0590f4c570aca8018, there's only 3 input and 2 output, where address 1PNQDmVYFhofPSBZKonz8RKUhxSFUFrQnN used on both input and output which deviate from the common behavior.

If he looks like a scammer, cheater and ban evader, creates stupid threads on this section like a scammer, cheater and ban evader, and when caught red handed replies like a scammer, cheater and ban evader, then I call him a scammer, cheater and ban evader.

A custodial wallet doesn't quite explain the evidence provided by nutildah. If it truly were a custodial wallet where you don't control the private keys (like those from centralized exchanges or gambling platforms), you wouldn't be able to initiate individual transactions from those addresses, as shown in the example provided by nutildah:


The transaction in question has three shared inputs and two outputs, one of which returns funds back to your wallet (change address). This suggests control over the private keys.

Now, if you're talking about a different kind of "custodial" wallet, like the one on blockchain.com where you do control the keys, then it wouldn't make sense to only have some keys and not all of them, right?

Yeah, because that was a custodial addy (from an exchange or casino, could not recall).

First of all, I don't know how many accounts actually bought/sold with all the things you mentioned. I don't remember seeing such threads. Probably these thing happened a long time ago which I don't know. But I came to know that account selling is not prohibited and people used to buy sell account back in the old days. Even it was normal to collateral BitcoinTalk account to take loans.

The 2nd thing is, if that is the case, why do we even ask for a signed message from an old address knowing the current account owner could provide a signed message from an old address? It becomes a standard to ask for a signed message from an address and this is the reason people stake their Bitcoin address. This is why I thought It would be okay if he can sign a message.

This just keeps getting better and better! This is why I love threads like this in the Reputation section. Hahahaha!

Great job @nutildah. I will review the evidence you have provided, and I think this will justify adding a bit more red to the OP account.

These must be bought accounts; its hard to imagine that they are all still controlled by one person. But what to do with these ones:


They are technically ban evading & I can prove it, although it requires connecting alts that share addresses. On the other hand, its been 9 years & they haven't scammed anybody since purchasing the accounts (pretty sure that is what happened).


What's funny is I was going to let the whole thing be. I certainly didn't coordinate anything with JollyGood and was ready to forget about it.

Ok, the whole thing makes more sense now, OP tried to discredit you preemptively with this thread, knowing that the walls are closing in.

Why do you think that account belongs to him personally if he signed the message from some old address? As far as I remember from some posts of those who sold BTT accounts, they included the full package - which means the original e-mail, and private keys for all publicly published addresses.

The only thing left as a possible proof that it is not the original owner is the comparison of IP addresses that can only be seen by the admin - and it only makes sense if the old and new owner did not use VPN or Tor.

It seems we will not see the OP again.

He was online and active a couple of hours after the detailed and informative post by nutildah but has opted to not post a reply. It is probably safe to assume he will be focusing on his other accounts that have not been discovered yet as he attempts to recover from what just happened to his TheGreatPython account.

Had he not brought all that attention to himself, he might have gone unnoticed again for several years but now he has lost any practical use of the account he was trying to get in to a campaign (and each of the associated accounts will be tagged).

Good. Another jerk who comes here to protest about being treated unfairly and leaves with a much worse reputation. I think this is going to be a contrarian indicator when someone protests we better prepare the red tags.

In this case I will wait to see what he says since this is what Nutildah, who has done the work, is going to before leaving a nice red tag in his profile.

WTF was that?
I was actually convinced once he signed a message from an old address. So, even if he is the original owner of this account, he is ban evader, scammer and cheater? It's all based on your comment because I haven't checked the cases for each user. You have mentioned dozens of accounts and addresses. Now I am curious if OP would comeback saying yes, I bought this account and the wallet and I am not associated with those accounts. In both cases, his account will be painted red. But, I am curious what will be his response.

I was saying this.

This is another topic in which the OP will seem to bury himself much deeper than he imagined - because even if only 10% of what was written in the previous post were true, then it only reveals the extent to which some are prepared to go to achieve some of their goals. I'm also interested in what the OP has to say about all this...

Well this is interesting. You share a wallet with loan scammer lemipawa.





Let's take a look at what other accounts use this wallet:

1HJAVemb5v8WvBRKVqpJrtujPLaGd3UfC8 - Beymond (inactive)
16zp7rX9xPKNGW59scY6ZrB2Wz7mehmrB2 - wayneyoyo (-3 trust)
151V2aLR9QCes65LC4RNCMXgkGhVujm7XD - Beymond/Winalunt (inactive)
1DdffAP4WJoZbrdezXq9ptHeHhgpQ2hvBB - sosulon (banned)
16Rk4mqYKDRPvPjnvdbEbJgBU3zKtWLFZ1 - Beymond/Sniar (banned)
1CtJGHpc1UpN9qTaD6ZeMSRhNM6CAxkTPA - Sniar/fr0sties (inactive)
1PkhUt1XY7LoPj3nTyTFpF1eae7uiDqn4u - chaolang (banned)/Inkvor (inactive)
14koWo7eACQAw1XV71EK3uVFdtuieJfY9M - sosulon/Kiweikoo (banned)
1CncdEpheAjaN7Ta9KDrfhPoNKDB8rHjQ7 - sosulon
1Pbx8ZwXCuGYc91m3KzE3ZaFv9cp3F6Dae - Daijess (banned)
12oe3ifQXLEvYndNQ9u3wJ1b85LRnToZx9 - Alarmoz (inactive)
1FKSepDE9nLoWKWm52R5EJEmQVuyL7UWAb - Quasis (inactive)/Reenth (inactive)
18AX93bL7gtgadzKgjPRfpkXQFMR12fFCe - chaolang/nikona (inactive)/chaosPT (banned)
1GTVdyau7QmvAgZacDn6gXbYLk9xkVvfGX - davinchi (-1 trust, alt accounts connected)
17iPvTFx3HYPS8Mp8KWQaMXWB55yTTB5W2 - lemipawa/xinzark (banned)
19WtTNeKKbjKu6NQu2YSpSxwDT6ooaU18Z - Gladdy (inactive)/darlings (-1 trust)
1CPYBnqkfpqTdzQbQphEcAECNKCVbrQyQE - Sniar/wayneyoyo
1FtVMS4KzeJWyrdoEFsjo7ogw8bRsHmHFh - arallmuus (DT2)
1GmZVjPypWyREsi6HfVoAvf2WUdmUN6mVh - Inkvor/Alarmoz (inactive)
1H9jgsUdRtQiMjih5jWgFazye1xRHBbCGk - arallmuus
1PcgQXeVXN3kSNDYhLWgXMPg1t3bxWSuKo - MCdelux (inactive)/ZendiMOREN (inactive)
115fPdcnjE9hNo5Hwun7QLr3eWpDF93RKx - lemipawa/Daijess
1ANY4AY94MyYL7z45tVyqAMmphg61zsx4i - Sniar/jeep.jeep (banned)
13sBJfsUUBsrdsfqa5BtMSfVE5Tm4ALoFw - eMoxes (inactive)
1CJioEjSNrstkqejzLEjZYbQZeWTnWz2Bp - lemipawa/ajaxmoor (+2 trust, inactive)
12Y9A5TtxiuZn9MaVGgf8ukYJu2RPHznxv - Reenth/Nombuchril (inactive)
1J8EfHyMpm3PfmvchSphDugbcnrwnD6FST - ladyfox (banned)/Dohat (inactive)
1Bcvk2TfmveW1VWxLS1eCE3yF61oTjAeuo - lemipawa/adicted (inactive)
1MyMrP98tC4v8NTYwxj4RYWUUpX5bpSE2L - Chrismon (inactive)/roreick (inactive)
1A2WYMNb6JbGqJk1oCEGpbG8iAKEPEnqKB - teddybear (active)
1HXZ6vCx5G9hPdfm9ULrr62hzBwFnEXaxz - Gladdy (inactive)
1Hewedt4WCXkHHB77mJEXHV1jwWeAXoWCZ - vennali (-5 trust, inactive)/Munouhapi (inactive)
1BzD6g9mKkHtT16XA4AFELwfhQ7ujhC3mT - DevilMayCry (inactive)/phibay (+1 trust, inactive)
17X2dNhr61pnRus3GwmiHxqA7DtKEg2U58 - wuvdoll (banned)
1AtEHKngL7Bkkx5caw56C4wmx8sdny5XCH - wayneyoyo/vennali/teddybear
13ECgup8zi58cWNSKoMHwUuP7vFQHAQ4rm - Sniar/LucasJunior (banned)/havecoch (neutral tag for bought account, inactive)/Vesther (inactive)
1xQcedxKzZ5prx3Y5HDbjAVpPtyVaHoeV - Opekill (inactive)/DoubleTrouble (inactive)
1bTTMPfxYZP18r4Na9WoBT4HgqcgEhAM5 - kurapica (inactive)
169bLUGkRzFKm2iZQuBgqp9Ue3McUxUmkN - DoubleTrouble/deuce22 (inactive -1 trust for account trading)/PantFire (inactive)
1LihEhPr2uinagaTsDhSGc75W1mvWuBsqH - vennali
1LAzbbfC3WviDgUXaVVA2HU6MEKhwKUgWy - crazyrapid (inactive)
18NXQto1ZDYU3aXgWyzkjWhAdpAfpUYtka - Ponymah (inactive)
1FKUaEo3XLPJ1zHRRfwudVrxQ3yvtowwYh - lolipop (inactive)
1PGezYkcBBRj9PTHt1KvzdJdFaTyiDbA1b - Lixer (active)
14S74rSNir3FgdpZ48ksK4tkKTKx33FioL - PantFire/millionbaby (inactive)
1EkWDe8epjXAQRrFXzCn5JgDAWRYX6AXYU - TheGreatPython (active)
1BwPWkJ5iePeY68TLNEoCgRh4cFrcrcZVt - memoryDept (banned)
1DQjoZfxp7YTdDeQEDKuhUwhtBU82n9GHp - Noisskal (inactive)
15KFMptRWbaPtZZXi6At9YpeK6tw1Zw4Dn - Umworpol (banned)
1DnX4ApQbGJBgA5WU8UvpR8WZwR6kDhYYZ - arallmuus/ZendiMOREN/Nombuchril
1EqVjb8C9P1adc5X312EKfRKoFRzP3Lwn9 - bosskilla (inactive)
1CuwC8nsrvSKddSq3QDTk2oQAoyXtZTRv4 - Laosai (-1 for being alt of scammer, inactive)
1PNQDmVYFhofPSBZKonz8RKUhxSFUFrQnN - TheGreatPython

Because you are the original account owner, as you so fastidiously claim, that means you're a campaign/contest cheater, loan scammer, hacked account seller, thief and ban evader.

Before red tagging you I'm really curious to see what kind of defense you'll put up against this.

If your second sentence is making such an assumption, there is no reason to continue reading.  If you have facts, we can review them.   Nutty and Jolly have done nothing but good for this community. 

I don't know the whole story to give you opinion about you and whatever you have done but lovesmayfamilis proved his worth in the forum. Everyone have good and bad in the past, intentionally or unintentionally we make mistakes, it's the nature of human.

An account without making mistakes is cleverly crafted and well planned account to build reputation for whatever reasons it have but an account owned by an average person with ups and downs, mistake and corrections is surely an account that is behind a real person. lovesmayfamilis is one of these member who has real character.

Try to be real, you will not need to convince anyone.

How do you expect him to answer you there when you locked your thread right after?  Smart move indeed. 

Don't you think the better move might have been to just drop it and move on? You have 2 neutral tags, neither of which should harm your ability to do anything on this forum. Most of us probably have a neutral tag or 2 by this point with the way the trust system works. All you have done with this thread is likely put more eyes on your account, which if you are legit you have no worries, but if not those neutrals will be red at some point.

I only see 2 neutral trust ratings on your profile. One note from jolly which explains what happened pretty briefly and the other is suchmoon's diary notes which nobody cares about nowadays I guess. What's the purpose of this thread?

Do you accuse someone with something? Since they dropped their charges against you, you should move on and be a happy fella.

If you are accusing someone with something, then you should give us more details . Otherwise this thread serves no purpose or whatsoever.

Someone was mean to you and you proved them wrong, the story ended there.

Great strategy, claim that you're unfairly accused by launching unfounded accusations at others.

This belongs to the reputation board, as none of the members being mentioned on your post currently made any scam attempt, allegedly or proven. The one that you created for JG, would be better fit for such discussion than this one.

Oh, a small but helpful hint, when you create a thread, wanting people to address the challenge, perhaps it'll work better and better serve the purpose if you didn't lock them immediately after creation, as it will effectively prevent any means of discussion or any attempt at all, thus, rather counterproductive.

What happened::

nutildah is re-opening a closed case with the help of JollyGood. The reason for re-opening is not letting down their investigation work because they feel like letting down will de-faming of their investigation skills in front of this community.

Profile Links of people involved:
nutildah: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/nutildah-317618
JollyGood: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/jollygood-1016855
lovesmayfamilis: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/lovesmayfamilis-1982152

Reference Link:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/old-accounts-that-have-likely-been-hackedtraded-5506921

Detailed explanation:

1. nutildah suspected about the ownership of my account with a post from 2021 against my recent local board posting. Even I proved my ownership by signing with a post from 2016, they were not ready to accept and kept refusing without proper explanation or proof for their claim.

2. After 3 weeks of struggle, finally nutildah decided (literally pretended) to remove my trust page tag but asked JollyGood to take over.

3. nutildah had never been ready to give up their one of investigation effort by removing their tag which must be be the primary reason why JollyGood entered into the picture.

4. JollyGood has been active on the same topic but decided to tag all the users whose cases posted on that topic on the same exact day where nutildah removing my tag after unable to explain their claims.

5. Asking for additional tagging is not a problem or asking to take over is not a problem. But, tricking to re-open a closed case by asking another person is a definite sign of abusement.

6. From the beginning, nutildah were too conscious about not removing their tag even after a cryptographic proof was submitted. Due to this exact same reason, the help from JollyGood might have been asked.

7. JollyGood tagged me just after nutildah removing the tag, with contents which is similar to what nutildah did.

8. After I requested JollyGood about removing the tag by citing the proof I had submitted, they revised the comment which is still proving nutildah's investigation is accurate and my proof was manipulated one. This is another clear sign why JollyGood decided to tag on SAME DAY where nutildah removed theirs.

9. Taking over by JollyGood was not a co-incident which can be confirmed by lovesmayfamilis's post here. lovesmayfamilis was primary contributor on that topic but they remained biased even after I submit a cryptographic proof and never stated any opinion but he was excited to talk about my case after JollyGood taking over my case. Being biased even after a proof where they continuously contributing is definitely not a good sign.


Additional Notes:

nutildah :
1. nutildah registered here by 2014 but no traces of any BTC addy prior to 2018. The first BTC addy could be found on the post history is available from 2018 post. Probably all previous posts with BTC addys might have been deleted.
2. By 2014, all 100% posts were from altcoin boards but the posting interest changed to other boards by 2018/2019.
3. The password of nutildah account has been reset for exact 10 times within the time frame of 3 months in 2018.

https://bpip.org/Profile?id=317618



lovesmayfamilis:
A confirmed plagiariser who had been banned at least once.


Looking for your opinion....