alts potentially manipulating the trust system - should they be blacklisted? - page 2.

bonesjonesreturns

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 44

Quote from: marlboroza on April 05, 2020, 02:56:33 PM

Now look what you did nutildah, you triggered the troll. Now troll will spam the hell out of meta and reputation, I am glad that I don't see their posts but I feel sorry for people that do Sad

Quote from: nutildah on April 05, 2020, 08:54:28 AM

You can see all 3 of these members have been updating their respective trust lists relatively recently, with cryptohunter updating his list just this week

Well, theymos said 2/3 are alt accounts and as they are using alts to maliciously vote they should all be blacklisted.

You must have incontrovertible proof? Please provide it zorrobeck

I hope you can provide the video evidence that you said was the only evidence you malboroza would accept when quickseller stated that was your alt?

If theymos is going to start moderating bogus claims of abuse of the trust system based on zero proof then he will be called daily to answer why he is not moderating credible claims of scammers and their pals on DT1 based on irrefutable proof

Can't wait.

Funny to see a willing scam facilitator for pay crying for help from admin and his scammer supporting cronies.
Please theymos cries the probable alt nutildah or willing scam facilitator for pay. Please stop people i claim are alts removing scammers like me from the trust system.
Comedy gold.

I will quiz theymos on his actions and if he investigated nutildah is an alt. Based on historical evidences.

marlboroza

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 2272

Now look what you did nutildah, you triggered the troll. Now troll will spam the hell out of meta and reputation, I am glad that I don't see their posts but I feel sorry for people that do Sad

Quote from: nutildah on April 05, 2020, 08:54:28 AM

You can see all 3 of these members have been updating their respective trust lists relatively recently, with cryptohunter updating his list just this week

Well, theymos said 2/3 are alt accounts and as they are using alts to maliciously vote they should all be blacklisted.

bonesjonesreturns

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 44

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 01:44:25 PM

Quote from: bonesjonesreturns on April 05, 2020, 01:40:13 PM

~

Good to see you alive and well in these difficult times.

This thread lacks conclusive proof.
It is also a thread started by a willing scam facilitator for pay who would delete the evidence. It seems he has clear motivation for wanting to invalidate these very useful members votes that seem to only wish to see scammers like himself and his friends removed from DT.

Even were there theories correct that both are the same person which seems unlikely.

It clearly demonstrate the willful stupidity of conflating meaningless merit with trust.

I think there is clearer evidences nutildah is an alt of another DT and they are manipulating the trust system

Their account was for sale for 6 months
The original nutildah was a nem stake holder and early dash adopter (should be wealthy extremely)
The old nutildah said he never wanted to use sigs to milk money from the forum
The new nutildah is begging for 0.02 btc loans
The new nutildah is spamming sign

To me this member is simply upset that 2 useful members have outed the willing scam facilitating evidence deleting tiny loan beggar who is likely an alt

Nutildah is undeniably either

A willing scam facilitator or a liar

This is undeniable.

There is nothing other than this nutildah crying about being outed as a peasant scammer facilitator for pay by other useful and unblemished members of great repute.

There is no conclusive proof of these being the same person

There is clear evidence nutildah is a scammer facilitator and dirty bitch
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nutildah-willing-to-facilitate-scammers-for-around-300bucks-deleting-evidence-5190369

hacker1001101001

sr. member

Activity: 1288

Merit: 415

Quote from: DireWolfM14 on April 05, 2020, 01:27:22 PM

-not funny meme-

Nice attempt to show your support and political side's here, but I never support or said it's an bad idea to stop alt voting or manuplating it that way. Stop pretending.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: bonesjonesreturns on April 05, 2020, 01:40:13 PM

~

Good to see you alive and well in these difficult times.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 09:35:46 AM

Seeing how theymos blacklisted this farm I think blacklisting cryptohunter's alts would make sense too.

Agreed. May I suggest to move this topic to Meta, and slightly change the title to make it more obvious the problem is with voting sockpuppets?

I have very balanced Trust from ch:

Quote from: nutildah on April 05, 2020, 10:28:00 AM

I wouldn't be surprised if suchmoon and LoyceV provided at least _some_ of the merits, as they have with a lot of the active members of this forum.

Here's a complete overview:

Quote

As for me being a "Merit fan": I couldn't care less :P I have a shitload of Merit to get rid off, it's a continuous "burden" to spend it wisely, and even the biggest troll can have posts sometimes that are worth reading (even if it's just because the post says a lot about the person who posts

bonesjonesreturns

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 44

I would like to see the irrefutable and conclusive proof both are the same person posting.

I see motivation that both members clearly demonstrated nutildah was a scam facilitator for pay who tried to delete the evidences? Is this the proof you have?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nutildah-willing-to-facilitate-scammers-for-around-300bucks-deleting-evidence-5190369

The trust lists appear to be contradicting for some members lol

Nutildah the willing scam facilitator seems worried that both doesn't like his scam facilitating for pay though.

DireWolfM14

copper member

Activity: 2338

Merit: 4543

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:35:00 AM

And it's even logical to shoot the messenger as he explicitly mentions the names of the user's he distrusts or doesn't like !

It's a list of _everybody_ that was included by 2 or more of cryptohunter's alts. Some of them I _do_ trust or _do_ like. So you're just straight up lying here. Please try to be more careful with your words next time.

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:35:00 AM

Inspite of knowing they have no control over others trust lists.

I specifically mentioned that already.

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:35:00 AM

Not including your name and counting it at minimum 2 inclusions to avoid it in the list makes it a bit tricky.

This just makes no sense.

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:46:13 AM

Babbling about some hidden motives of the OP behind this thread. Take it as it suits you.

Such as....? Please do enlighten us.

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 10:51:28 AM

Well, then maybe start a separate thread to whine about OP's motives, which I'm sure are horrible and involve hollowed-out volcanoes and world domination.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:46:13 AM

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 10:39:31 AM

What the fuck are you babbling about... logical to shoot the messenger? Fuck no. Pull your head out of your ass.

Babbling about some hidden motives of the OP behind this thread. Take it as it suits you.

Well, then maybe start a separate thread to whine about OP's motives, which I'm sure are horrible and involve hollowed-out volcanoes and world domination.

And yet, despite said horrible motives, I still think that sockpuppets found out to be abusing the vote limits should be blacklisted from voting.

hacker1001101001

sr. member

Activity: 1288

Merit: 415

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 10:39:31 AM

What the fuck are you babbling about... logical to shoot the messenger? Fuck no. Pull your head out of your ass.

Babbling about some hidden motives of the OP behind this thread. Take it as it suits you.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: teeGUMES on April 05, 2020, 10:09:43 AM

If you weren't just a basic bitch nutildah you'd actually dig in further and see who provided the 10 merit needed to enable CH/TOAA/ToD to be able to have a meaningful vote. Chop chop bud. Probably a few names that you'd be a little bit more scared to make a post about.. I can see why you chose this route.

Quote from: teeGUMES on April 05, 2020, 10:25:22 AM

That's great and I agree. You can't deny that posting names of a large bunch of us that are labelled as "on the other side" is a good way to get this across. What I'm saying without throwing mud at nutildah is that merit is too freely given (even though some of their early posts are meritable) which should be the focus that the 10 merit minimum should be increased. This way a respectable member can merit a respectable post without accidentally giving this power to an alt when they are found out in the future.

This has nothing to do with merit senders. If a sockpuppet makes a good post it should be merited and the merit senders shouldn't be obligated to worry what the voting power is and whether it's an alt and whether that person will decide to misuse the trust system at some point later. And even if you increase the requirement to 50 it would still allow cryptohunter to vote at least twice.

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on April 05, 2020, 10:35:00 AM

Until it's proven to be alt (ex. with IP connections), I don't think theymos would act on it. And it's even logical to shoot the messenger as he explicitly mentions the names of the user's he distrusts or doesn't like ! Inspite of knowing they have no control over others trust lists. Not including your name and counting it at minimum 2 inclusions to avoid it in the list makes it a bit tricky.

What the fuck are you babbling about... logical to shoot the messenger? Fuck no. Pull your head out of your ass.

hacker1001101001

sr. member

Activity: 1288

Merit: 415

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 10:20:37 AM

Voting with alts should not be allowed. At the very least users who want to have trust lists on their alt accounts should ask theymos to have those accounts to be blacklisted from voting. The trust system allows you to vote for each DT1 candidate once. Bypassing that restriction with multiple accounts is not acceptable regardless of how you feel about the person bringing this up.

Until it's proven to be alt (ex. with IP connections), I don't think theymos would act on it. And it's even logical to shoot the messenger as he explicitly mentions the names of the user's he distrusts or doesn't like ! Inspite of knowing they have no control over others trust lists. Not including your name and counting it at minimum 2 inclusions to avoid it in the list makes it a bit tricky.

teeGUMES

legendary

Activity: 1253

Merit: 1203

Quote from: nutildah on April 05, 2020, 10:28:00 AM

snip

I posted right before you. A list that has my name on it can never be a good thing so I enter attack mode but I believe the last part of my previous post was me coming back down to earth and getting my point out.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

Young man, you need to wash your filthy mouth out with soap this instant!

I didn't expect this sort of reaction from anybody TBH but now that you have I will try to understand why.

I wouldn't be surprised if suchmoon and LoyceV provided at least _some_ of the merits, as they have with a lot of the active members of this forum.

OK well lets look at it.

Merit Fans of cryptohunter
stingers
jpcfan
dbshck
LoyceV
bones261
suchmoon
vlom
DarkStar_
mOgliE
OgNasty

Merit Fans of The-One-Above-All
suchmoon
LoyceV
Quickseller
FruitsBasket
Royse777
Bitlover10
DireWolfM14
LFC_Bitcoin
SaltySpitoon
Dabs

Merit Fans of truth or dare
Royse777
ibminer
Vispilio
o_e_l_e_o
PrimeNumber7
wwzsocki
Vod

OK, there's all the names of merit providers for you. Certainly nobody told cryptohunter to collude his alts together to manipulate DT. So what was your point exactly?

Quote from: teeGUMES on April 05, 2020, 10:25:22 AM

That's great and I agree. You can't deny that posting names of a large bunch of us that are labelled as "on the other side" is a good way to get this across.

I posted ALL the names of people included in 2 or more trust lists. If _you_ want to make that label for them, that's up to you.

teeGUMES

legendary

Activity: 1253

Merit: 1203

Quote from: suchmoon on April 05, 2020, 10:20:37 AM

Quote from: teeGUMES on April 05, 2020, 10:09:43 AM

I'd post a list like this too if I were too much of a coward to pull a Lauda and post and regularly bump my trust list. Four of the DT1 on this list distrust nutildah, let's see who this rallies in LoyceV's next trust list dump. If you weren't just a basic bitch nutildah you'd actually dig in further and see who provided the 10 merit needed to enable CH/TOAA/ToD to be able to have a meaningful vote. Chop chop bud. Probably a few names that you'd be a little bit more scared to make a post about.. I can see why you chose this route.

You're completely missing the point. Whatever you think nutildah's motivation is - this shit is stupid.

Voting with alts should not be allowed. At the very least users who want to have trust lists on their alt accounts should ask theymos to have those accounts to be blacklisted from voting. The trust system allows you to vote for each DT1 candidate once. Bypassing that restriction with multiple accounts should not be allowed.

That's great and I agree. You can't deny that posting names of a large bunch of us that are labelled as "on the other side" is a good way to get this across. What I'm saying without throwing mud at nutildah is that merit is too freely given (even though some of their early posts are meritable) which should be the focus that the 10 merit minimum should be increased. This way a respectable member can merit a respectable post without accidentally giving this power to an alt when they are found out in the future.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

Quote from: teeGUMES on April 05, 2020, 10:09:43 AM

I'd post a list like this too if I were too much of a coward to pull a Lauda and post and regularly bump my trust list. Four of the DT1 on this list distrust nutildah, let's see who this rallies in LoyceV's next trust list dump. If you weren't just a basic bitch nutildah you'd actually dig in further and see who provided the 10 merit needed to enable CH/TOAA/ToD to be able to have a meaningful vote. Chop chop bud. Probably a few names that you'd be a little bit more scared to make a post about.. I can see why you chose this route.

You're completely missing the point. Whatever you think nutildah's motivation is - this shit is stupid.

Voting with alts should not be allowed. At the very least users who want to have trust lists on their alt accounts should ask theymos to have those accounts to be blacklisted from voting. The trust system allows you to vote for each DT1 candidate once. Bypassing that restriction with multiple accounts is not acceptable regardless of how you feel about the person bringing this up.

teeGUMES

legendary

Activity: 1253

Merit: 1203

I'd post a list like this too if I were too much of a coward to pull a Lauda and post and regularly bump my trust list. Four of the DT1 on this list distrust nutildah, let's see who this rallies in LoyceV's next trust list dump. If you weren't just a basic bitch nutildah you'd actually dig in further and see who provided the 10 merit needed to enable CH/TOAA/ToD to be able to have a meaningful vote. Chop chop bud. Probably a few names that you'd be a little bit more scared to make a post about.. I can see why you chose this route.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

I mentioned earlier that "truth or dare" went off the cliff (i.e. devolved to his usual butthurt self) after being moderately sane for a while as soon as he earned 10+ merits. I wouldn't put it past him to be farming another stealth account as we speak.

Seeing how theymos blacklisted this farm I think blacklisting cryptohunter's alts would make sense too. Granted they didn't send merits to each other but they're clearly gaming the system by voting for the same users multiple times.

nutildah

legendary

Activity: 3010

Merit: 8114

(edited to make the title Meta-appropriate)

Even though we haven't heard much from cryptohunter lately (gee, where'd he go?), with his last post being on November 29th of last year, he continues to log in and update his trust list. The-One-Above-All apparently never came back from vacation, but thank goodness cryptohunter's truly legendary legacy could be continued by truth or dare, that is until March 11th, when they mysteriously vanished.

You can see all 3 of these members have been updating their respective trust lists relatively recently, with cryptohunter updating his list just this week:

cryptohunter
The-One-Above-All
truth or dare

As all 3 of these members have over 10 merits, their votes count in the DT selection, and I thought it was a bit unnerving that he frequently uses all 3 accounts to include the same members in his trust list. Of course these people have no control over whether CH adds them or not, but I just thought it was worth mentioning. The following accounts have been included in the trust lists of 2 or 3 of the aforementioned alts:

HostFat (2)
TECSHARE (3)
OgNasty (2)
Phinnaeus Gage (2)
Tomatocage (2)
peloso (2)
shorena (2)
Rmcdermott927 (3)
teeGUMES (3)
iluvbitcoins (2)
Thule (2)
Quickseller (2)
Royse777 (3)
bill gator (2)
stingers (2)
eddie13 (2)
TheFuzzStone (2)
hacker1001101001 (2)

Not saying it necessarily proves anything or changes DT in any measurable way, but cryptohunter and his (totally not) alts should be kept an eye on because there could come a day when someone is added to DT1 explicitly due to cryptohunter's manipulation.

I have not included bonesjonesreturns in this list as they only have 3 merits and do not have a trust list, so they are not relevant -- oh and also because they are in no way also cryptohunter... sure.

Topic: alts potentially manipulating the trust system - should they be blacklisted? - page 2. (Read 581 times)