Topic: "Anti-censorship" reply to Zilon, lol. (Read 272 times)

Oh good to hear, I was getting worried, need my fix

You you made a decision to lock the thread you created. You then decided to post here therefore should have used your posts in this thread to try to put forward an alternative argument with a view to try to have some feedback removed/revised. You have not contributed anything productive in this thread.

I am sure you have other accounts which have not yet been discovered therefore you should consider giving up on the Zilon and associated farmed accounts and concentrate on the others.

With all the evidence its only one merit you can give out mtchew.... nultilda don't worry more merit is coming...

Another decisive factor here is the case of sharing the same BTC address:


And let's not forget about his blunt confession:

There's some compelling circumstantial evidence, which includes Last Actives that are 6 seconds apart, as well as sending BNB back and forth to associated addresses:



But probably the most firm piece of evidence was found by Jawhead999, which is a first-of-its-kind association via an imgbb account:


Don't know why I never tagged these account as this is pretty clear proof these are alts. Seems like -3 and -4 is enough already.

I cannot speak for others but I am open to removing/revising any feedback I have left for any member as long as I can be shown I made an error of judgement. The case did not look good at all in the first instance but now you state the first you knew anything about the associated accounts was when you read the names here in this thread (rather than by your own feedback).

Personally, I see this as you using this probably as the final opportunity to save as many accounts as you can, you are clutching at straws but having said that if you ever change your mind and explain why the negative feedbacks on all associated accounts should be removed/revised, I will look at it.

Because he use a same imgbb's account which also used by dbc23 and Alisha-k, I can expect he will give an excuse if they're brother, sister, friends etc, I wouldn't buy such story.

Don't lie, this will not be the end, you will create a new alt account.

After all I can see you're still active using this account.

I don't think there is anything to comment. it even pains me that accounts i am getting to know about through this thread is also linked to me but it is fine. I am not out to convince anybody like i said earlier any body can assume what the want to assume since i can't defend myself let me bear the consequence.


I am not asking for tag removal either my major questions have been answered by Poker Player and i am satisfied with his response. He stated the obvious. I doubt if i will have to fake positive presence just to get the negative tags removed, if i should do that it will show how jobless and independent i am. There are lots of options out there to continue with why kill myself over a spilled milk.

I just tagged dbc23, as I checked out that thread where he got called out for an extreme change in posting style after coming back from a break.  I know the other accounts were linked by blockchain evidence, but I've stopped tagging people based on that because of the reasonable doubt left in my mind after hearing that people actually do share wallets.

What's the consensus here about Zilon and the rest being connected?  Just curious, and I haven't gone back and read the thread that I used for reference in the neg I handed to dbc23.

That's reasonable, and that's basically been my policy as well when it comes to reversing red trust.  But it's rare that someone will PM me a year (or even later) after they got tagged and have any kind of evidence that they've been a positive presence here.  Digaran is an exception to that perhaps, but I wouldn't even count 10 months of non-paid posting as an argument for removing a tag.

If possible could you comment directly on the allegations that the following are farmed accounts you have used to participate in nefarious activities: dbc23, Zilon, Alisha-k, Mistafreeze, DomainMagnate, Rococo23, coco2392, dricoco23

Let us not forget, these are the known connected accounts (possibly one of the above is innocent of being connected but the caveat of having me feedback revised is there) therefore what would you like to present as your argument to have the negative feedback removed/revised from that left it for you?
 

On the contrary, I have been quite clear on this issue. In this forum if paid signature campaigns were to disappear I would expect a 99% reduction in traffic. In my case, I have been in other forums for many years, and I used to do this activity before registering in this one, without being paid. Now I am still registered in other forums, but guess where I write 95% of what I write.

So yes, getting paid to post is a very important component of the traffic here, but it is also very important to respect the rules. If you don't, you risk having difficulty or even impossibility to participate in paid signature campaigns.

You have been able to clear my doubts and i am not in any way soliciting you remove the tag. So far your reply here is clear enough but unfortunately moving on with this account is total waste of time when i have other things to attend to. I won't come here to prove to anyone i deserve their trust everyone have the right to believe whatever and act the way the choose to.



Prove to me it is not the same monetary value that has kept you on this forum all along. Let's stop this habit of painting others black just to stand out as the saint, it is uncalled for and not necessary. If Royse777 accepted Digaran in one of his campaigns it was simply a matter of choice. And it will be so funny to realise Digaran is even more reputable than most critics who parade the forum with lots of positive tags. I think it is high time the highly profiled users get policed around.

Note the irony. I have seen Zilon's thread that he just locked and as I want to respond I thought of opening a new one that reminded me of BenCodie's one.

In it, Zilon asked:


As I am one of those who left you red tag I would like to respond. I am open to review of my tags, but in this case I see it difficult because it is a massive rule breaking with several alts accounts. If evidence were presented that all three of us red taggers were wrong I understand that we would delete or change the feedback. Another thing could be that over time you would continue to use the forum without breaking the rules and maybe it could be changed to neutral, or if you showed trustworthy in some way you could earn green feedbacks over the red ones.

Obviously the concern you have about this is monetary. The feedbacks at the very least make it difficult to participate in paid signature campaigns and if there are many without any green ones, they make it impossible. But they are not the end of the world, I have recently seen that Royse777 has accepted Digaran, who does not have a very nice trust profile, in one of his campaigns. Surely Royse777 has weighed other reasons that outweight his profile to accept him. One thing I see is that Digaran has been posting for about 10 months without getting paid and that could be one of the reasons.

I want to be clear that this is not a criticism of Royse777, just an example of how a member with bad trust profile could join a good signature campaign.