Thank you Martin will make things easier and quicker
Let me know if you need any other information!
BTW - you need to be 18 to file a lawsuit in Canada, so if you want to file right away, you'll need to get your parent's permission.
Topic: Announcement @Lauda @ThePharacist @actmyname @Timelord2067 @suchmoon - page 9. (Read 3989 times)
November 01, 2018, 08:48:05 PM
Let me know if you need any other information!
BTW - you need to be 18 to file a lawsuit in Canada, so if you want to file right away, you'll need to get your parent's permission.
November 01, 2018, 08:45:47 PM
Thank you Martin will make things easier and quicker
November 01, 2018, 08:39:29 PM
If you think your IP can't be found you are in mistake
But a small research of your old posts will give also some hints i guess.
Maybe even your old ICQ number will help
But a small research of your old posts will give also some hints i guess.
Maybe even your old ICQ number will help
My old 8082129 ICQ number?
You want my public IP? I'm not on TOR.
Your Public IPv4 is: 104.205.172.244
Your IPv6 is: Not Detected
Your Local IP is: 10.69.169.149
Location: Slave Lake, AB CA
ISP: Telus Communications Inc.
November 01, 2018, 08:34:17 PM
Let's see how smart you will be in court.I just made a screenshot and will also forward it.
Hmm, did you talk to Bob, Roger or Fiona?
Hope it's not Fiona - she tends to dismiss cases where the person is obviously lying.
P.S. I am just as smart in imaginary lawsuits as i am on the forum.
If you think your IP can't be found you are in mistake
But a small research of your old posts will give also some hints i guess.
Maybe even your old ICQ number will help
or the adress of your expired domain
November 01, 2018, 08:28:41 PM
Let's see how smart you will be in court.I just made a screenshot and will also forward it.
Hmm, did you talk to Bob, Roger or Fiona?
Hope it's not Fiona - she tends to dismiss cases where the person is obviously lying.
P.S. I am just as smart in imaginary lawsuits as i am on the forum.
November 01, 2018, 08:27:33 PM
Let's see how smart you will be in court.I just made a screenshot and will also forward it.
November 01, 2018, 08:20:55 PM
Also its says risked amount and not scammed amount which VOD claimed
Hmm, I am the first to admit I am wrong when I have mistrusted someone. I can remove the negative trust.
Did you risk 100 btc with The Pharmacist?
I never discredited or defamed someone without proof.
I see you claiming you risked over half a million dollars with The Pharmacist, and it turned out to be a negative experience for you.
That's pretty serious defamation... common sense would tell most people to not trust him, right?
So, can you provide proof you risked that coin?
If you can sign an address showing you had 100 btc during the time period, I will remove the negative trust.
I am very fair.
(Note: I talked to the Canadian Embassy - they said your message was garbeled and they need you to call back...
The judge will surely ask how its possible that other members will think you guys gave me that negativ trust feedback just to alert people when everyone who is checking it will see
"You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."
Also when the judge will check your profiles and see the massiv amount of people giving you negativ feedback for the same reason i freaked out and where you can provide no evidence than i can tell you it will be an easy game
"You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."
Also when the judge will check your profiles and see the massiv amount of people giving you negativ feedback for the same reason i freaked out and where you can provide no evidence than i can tell you it will be an easy game
Well, if those judges do that, I won't invite them over for the holidays, even if my mother says I need to include my cousins. :/
November 01, 2018, 08:18:54 PM
Also its says risked amount and not scammed amount which VOD claimed
Hmm, I am the first to admit I am wrong when I have mistrusted someone. I can remove the negative trust.
Did you risk 100 btc with The Pharmacist?
I never discredited or defamed someone without proof.
I see you claiming you risked over half a million dollars with The Pharmacist, and it turned out to be a negative experience for you.
That's pretty serious defamation... common sense would tell most people to not trust him, right?
So, can you provide proof you risked that money?
If you can sign an address showing you had 100 btc during the time period, I will remove the negative trust.
I am very fair.
November 01, 2018, 08:19:08 PM
Here's the case in point: you put down "100 BTC" as the risked amount in the feedback.
Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
This is the crux of the issue with Thule's rant against Vod's feedback (or at least part of it). You'll notice that when I tag account sellers, I don't enter an amount for "risked BTC" because that would imply that I was scammed for that amount or at least there was some sort of transaction with bitcoin at stake. Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
Thule entered 100BTC as the amount at risk when he left me one of his 3 negs. There was absolutely no need for that, and anyone reading the feedback might actually think I scammed you for that amount--regardless of the text of your feedback. It was a wrong thing to do, and that's why Vod called you out on it.
I'm not going to keep argueing with people who have clearly no knowledge at all about law which they already proofed several times in the past.
How about you expand on that statement and just state that you're going to stop arguing with any people about this non-issue. It's obviously getting you nowhere, and I suspect people are tired of responding to you when this crap keeps going around in lunatic circles.You are posting nonsense.How does it come it didn't bothered you and Vod for 10 months these 100 BTC you claim i say you scammed me ?
First of all its the risked amount and not scammed amount.Who doesn't say if i go your stupid thinking i may lose 100 BTC because of your false feedback and claims ?
Now show me where i have been pledged guilty of a crime that Vod called me openly a criminal.
But rest assured Vod will be able to explain his view to a judge.I'm pretty sure that judge will ask him if he smokes pot or something else if his conclusion is based on the trust feedback i gave you as no normal person could have such an conclusion based on the feedback i gave.
There is in the real world something called reasoning and no judge ever will accept the kind of thinking Vod is providing.
Its also funny how hard you insist that the amount of BTC is being the amount you scammed me even it only asks for risked BTC and not scammed BTC but deny the fact that when giving negativ trust you officaly
claim i scammed or tried to scam you "You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." claiming its based on trust and has nothing to do with scamming.
The judge will surely ask how its possible that other members will think you guys gave me that negativ trust feedback just to alert people when everyone who is checking it will see
"You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."
Also when the judge will check your profiles and see the massiv amount of people giving you negativ feedback for the same reason i freaked out and where you can provide no evidence than i can tell you it will be an easy game
November 01, 2018, 07:59:06 PM
Here's the case in point: you put down "100 BTC" as the risked amount in the feedback.
Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
This is the crux of the issue with Thule's rant against Vod's feedback (or at least part of it). You'll notice that when I tag account sellers, I don't enter an amount for "risked BTC" because that would imply that I was scammed for that amount or at least there was some sort of transaction with bitcoin at stake. Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
Thule entered 100BTC as the amount at risk when he left me one of his 3 negs. There was absolutely no need for that, and anyone reading the feedback might actually think I scammed you for that amount--regardless of the text of your feedback. It was a wrong thing to do, and that's why Vod called you out on it.
I'm not going to keep argueing with people who have clearly no knowledge at all about law which they already proofed several times in the past.
How about you expand on that statement and just state that you're going to stop arguing with any people about this non-issue. It's obviously getting you nowhere, and I suspect people are tired of responding to you when this crap keeps going around in lunatic circles. 
November 01, 2018, 07:47:12 PM
Funny that you instantly whined like a baby for the red trust i gave you claiming its unfair and adding a red trust to my account as revange
Exactly like I stated in my feedback - you live in alternate reality. No such thing happened in this universe.
November 01, 2018, 07:36:21 PM
~ whine
Nobody gives a shit about your name. Your trust ratings aren't visible publicly so no one outside of this forum would even know about it if you didn't whine so much.
On the other hand, the ratings you sent to other people are mostly false and unsubstantiated, which further defeats your claims. Did you mention all that to the Canadian embassy?
Whats your issue jumping from one topic to the next and getting destroyed?
I never discredited or defamed someone without proof.
You got your negativ rating for commenting that its ok to call someone a scammer and fraud without proof that its just enough that somebody just has such an opinion and that i should calm downand accept it.
Funny that you instantly whined like a baby for the red trust i gave you claiming its unfair and adding a red trust to my account as revange
Didn't you just said 5 minutes earlier its ok to make negativ feedback and calling names if somebody feels so even if he has no evidence or nothing happened?
Funny you changed your mind so quickly once you get involved.And yes i have no issue showing that in court since i got your indirect permission to do so.
November 01, 2018, 07:28:53 PM
~ whine
Nobody gives a shit about your name. Your trust ratings aren't visible publicly so no one outside of this forum would even know about it if you didn't whine so much.
On the other hand, the ratings you sent to other people are mostly false and unsubstantiated, which further defeats your claims. Did you mention all that to the Canadian embassy?
November 01, 2018, 07:18:29 PM
The issue is that my nick is being known on other boards and this discredits my person and my company when calling me fraud,scammer,criminal and i told them about it and that i can't accept something like that.
That's a good point. Perhaps I should e-mail Thule and let them know that some asshole is discrediting them by running around intertubes with their name and saying the stupidest things.
Nah I'm too lazy for that.
Do i need to understand your BS ?
Your are even unable to distinguish between the person with the nick thule who runs a company and the company named thule which has a trademark on that name for roof boxes.
You wanna me explain also for your limited thinking why anybody can use that name when its not related to roof boxes.
I'm not going to keep argueing with people who have clearly no knowledge at all about law which they already proofed several times in the past.
November 01, 2018, 07:10:46 PM
The issue is that my nick is being known on other boards and this discredits my person and my company when calling me fraud,scammer,criminal and i told them about it and that i can't accept something like that.
That's a good point. Perhaps I should e-mail Thule and let them know that some asshole is discrediting them by running around intertubes with their name and saying the stupidest things.
Nah I'm too lazy for that.
November 01, 2018, 06:40:11 PM
A great example of the double standards on this forum the community is complaining about
This forum should be considered unmoderated. While some obviously illegal things do get deleted and taken care of to limit the liability of the website owner and admins, there is very little moderation going on in the marketplace. As such, DT1 and DT2 has stepped in to try and fill that void with some sort of moral standard. And since it is mostly an unorganized group of individuals there are conflicting moral agreements and things like that. Those people are literally all we have in terms of scams/reprehensible behavior.You can say it's illegal, and maybe some things are, and certainly there is rampant scamming which is illegal, but Theymos will probably not respond to subpoenas given to him for user data even if you somehow found him and got a lawyer in his country to issue it.
So this forum is great for public discussions but very poor for marketplace activities or anything involving money, which I've come to understand from being a member in a heavily moderated forum that was made for marketplace transactions. That forum even goes as far as creating hashes of IP addresses and displaying them and all matching IP hashes publicly to see if the same user is coming back so they can prevent them from scamming. The moderators and admins actively view first posts to see if a non-home IP address is being used and if not issue a huge warning about that user. Maybe Bitcointalk just isn't the forum for you, and that's ok. It serves a good purpose and is flawed, but nobody should really be mad about that.
I understand these issues since i am running myself several forums which i build over the last 11 years.
However i would never allow to play judge and defame somebody calling diffrent names without even knowing if he scammed or not.
The defame was a clear attack NOT because i bought a single account no it was because i didn't agree on their argumentations.
I told them clearly the reason i bought an account that i read the forum rules before buying and even asked a Mod if its allowed which he confirmed.
They started making me look like a scammer and even calling in public.
I asked them to remove it and instead i got a bunch of dickheads who have clearly some ego issues attacking me with diffrent names and defaming.
I have nothing done which could lead to call me a scammer,fraud,criminal .
They defamed with clear intention to destroy somebodies reputation and give a fuck if its legit or not.
They claim they have the right to do it because there is a community consensus about it.
Funny i never read about any of these consensus.Just some DT members talking to themself is no community consensus expecially when the forum rules clearly says its allowed and even a mod confirmed it positiv.
Instead of saying listen we will make it neutral since you actually checked the forum rules and asked a mod which could lead to that situation they punched me with massiv negativ trust calling diffrent names etc without having any proof i ever scammed someone.
You think if i would be a scammer i would care about that account ?
I could just go and buy a legendary.
The issue is that my nick is being known on other boards and this discredits my person and my company when calling me fraud,scammer,criminal and i told them about it and that i can't accept something like that.
Since they had never before someone who really cared about his name they were teached to discredit someone and move on.
Here its not going to happen.
Lauda is smart and already deleted a comment.
I also never planned to go to court but VOD clearly explode anything by calling me in public a criminal.
For your info the defentition of a criminal :
Quote
An individual who has been found guilty of the commission of conduct that causes social harm and that is punishable by law; a person who has committed a crime.
You guys are talking a lot about defending from scammers.Who is defending me from abusers who defame and discredit without proof ?
The forum rules clearly says they won't play judge but you did without providing any evidence that i scammed anybody because buying a single account is no evidence of scamming anybody.
defamer :
Quote
To damage the reputation, character, or good name of (someone) by slander or libel.
November 01, 2018, 01:46:29 PM
A great example of the double standards on this forum the community is complaining about
This forum should be considered unmoderated. While some obviously illegal things do get deleted and taken care of to limit the liability of the website owner and admins, there is very little moderation going on in the marketplace. As such, DT1 and DT2 has stepped in to try and fill that void with some sort of moral standard. And since it is mostly an unorganized group of individuals there are conflicting moral agreements and things like that. Those people are literally all we have in terms of scams/reprehensible behavior.You can say it's illegal, and maybe some things are, and certainly there is rampant scamming which is illegal, but Theymos will probably not respond to subpoenas given to him for user data even if you somehow found him and got a lawyer in his country to issue it.
So this forum is great for public discussions but very poor for marketplace activities or anything involving money, which I've come to understand from being a member in a heavily moderated forum that was made for marketplace transactions. That forum even goes as far as creating hashes of IP addresses and displaying them and all matching IP hashes publicly to see if the same user is coming back so they can prevent them from scamming. The moderators and admins actively view first posts to see if a non-home IP address is being used and if not issue a huge warning about that user. Maybe Bitcointalk just isn't the forum for you, and that's ok. It serves a good purpose and is flawed, but nobody should really be mad about that.
October 31, 2018, 08:19:23 AM
Yes i will contact today the DT1 members who elected VOD and will hold them responsible for his actions and permanent lies.
Maybe i will even go a step further on him with legal charges for calling me in public a scammer and a criminal.
You are free to do both of those things, but I suspect you won't do either and predict that if you do, it's just going to feed your impotent rage. Vod's not getting removed from DT over your problem, and law enforcement would probably try to stifle their laughter.Maybe i will even go a step further on him with legal charges for calling me in public a scammer and a criminal.
Here's the case in point: you put down "100 BTC" as the risked amount in the feedback.
Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
This is what I've been trying to explain to him. The amount he put in that feedback is the basis for Vod's claim that Thule is lying in his feedback about me by claiming I scammed him for 100 bitcoins. Thule either doesn't understand it or is willfully ignoring it. It bothers me not a bit either way, given that I have many negs from people who have made some very specific claims of me scamming them for very specific amounts--and none of them include any valid (leading to evidence of me scamming) references, and most don't include reference links at all.Why? There was no BTC involved in any trade or lack thereof.
I've made mistakes in tagging members before, and when I realize my mistake I try to make good. But there's a world of difference between a mistake made with the intention of trying to warn others against a shady member or outright scammer, and revenge feedback. The latter is what Thule is engaging in, as are most people who've left me (and Vod, Lauda, actmyname, marlboroza, and others) negs.
Back in January, you wrote this post:
just have a look guys.Selling accounts is according to guidelines allowed
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unofficial-list-of-official-bitcointalkorg-rules-guidelines-faq-703657
At that time account sellers/buyers were routinely getting tagged by DT members even though it isn't explicitly against forum rules--and the practice of doing such had been discussed since probably 2016. The forum has rules, but the community has standards. Bitcointalk doesn't moderate scams, for instance, but you can be damn sure scammers are going to get tagged. Thus your argument above holds no water.https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unofficial-list-of-official-bitcointalkorg-rules-guidelines-faq-703657
I don't think all account buyers/sellers are scammers, but it's a behavior that I don't trust and I believe in my usual feedback statement "Account [buyers/sellers] are not to be trusted" when I leave it on people's trust page. Now that I've been called out for fucking up royally in the case of iluvbitcoins, I'm going to be weighing individual circumstances a lot more heavily before handing out negs to account dealers. Having said that, my feedback on Thule is on the money.
I've also been known to remove negs from members when they've demonstrated improvement, but based Thule's shitty attitude, empty threats, and unjustified retaliatory feedbacks, that's not likely to ever happen.
October 31, 2018, 07:55:32 AM
Here's the case in your point
Everyone with a working brain instantly see for what my negativ rating was.What you guys are doing is to interpret something into it which doesn't exist.
Exactly. Your negative rating is for buying an account. I don't trust that behavior, full stop. You can choose to conflate this with being a scammer, but if this is the case, then clearly the same applies to you, correct?Quote
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
Everyone with a working brain instantly see for what my negativ rating was.What you guys are doing is to interpret something into it which doesn't exist.
All your negative feedback implies that those such users are scammers. Pray tell, why are they scammers?
Quote
The only reason I didn't see this is because I was not looking for the keyword "criminal" and because I am not omniscient
You must be blind not having seen the massiv amount of being called a scammer and fraud by Lauda and his gang even you participated in these threads.
Never saw you say a single word about it to anyone
But i will tell you something.You are a high professional in creating excuses or discrediting
Quote
All your negative feedback implies that those such users are scammers. Pray tell, why are they scammers?
I used the negativ trust feedback only once before since i never had to deal myself with a scammer other than bittrex which froze accounts without reasons for months, so i had not the right to do it.I started using it against members who abused the trust feedback system claiming you don't need to be proofen for a scam but its just enough if you don't like me and have no trust in me.
I gave to noone negativ trust besides people abusing that system or claiming that the trust system can be used for any reason
Quote
Again, if you want to show a post that involves someone calling you a scammer (which you should be doing for each person you claim to have done that) then I will acquiesce.
LOL yeah right.....VOD contacted you about my wording or did you stepped in without him asking? 
October 31, 2018, 06:51:04 AM
Here's the case in your point
Everyone with a working brain instantly see for what my negativ rating was.What you guys are doing is to interpret something into it which doesn't exist.
Exactly. Your negative rating is for buying an account. I don't trust that behavior, full stop. You can choose to conflate this with being a scammer, but if this is the case, then clearly the same applies to you, correct?Quote
Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.
Everyone with a working brain instantly see for what my negativ rating was.What you guys are doing is to interpret something into it which doesn't exist.
All your negative feedback implies that those such users are scammers. Pray tell, why are they scammers?
Quote
The only reason I didn't see this is because I was not looking for the keyword "criminal" and because I am not omniscient
You must be blind not having seen the massiv amount of being called a scammer and fraud by Lauda and his gang even you participated in these threads.
Never saw you say a single word about it to anyone
But i will tell you something.You are a high professional in creating excuses or discrediting
Jump to: