Topic: be.open & Sancho18 - bounty cheaters. (Read 2717 times)

Raise this issue in Meta if it's all wrong and there shouldn't be such DTs in the forum.

be.open is stupid troll and paid provoker supporting a war

translated

He's a proven liar with multiple accounts, that was demonstrated many times by a lot of people including myself. You're trying to deny the facts which are publicly available.

P. S. I have a small question, respected by whom?  

That doesn't mean that normal users who are not merit source could be tagged for something stupid involving merit.

Don't waste others time because you don't like someone, buy creating unwanted accusations and drama around. I am out.

You forget that it was said in the context of the discussion of the meritsors 

You should trust none of them, all of those millions are wrong, all of them should be out of DT.

I already did hence making conclusions.


As I said better handled by campaign manager by kicking out the participant.


Theymos doesn't encourage DTs to tag for merit abuse.


He was not engaged in account trading/changing/gifting, he just lied about it, that could be displayed via a neutral for sure.

Before making such conclusions, you should have read the whole topic.

1.) Bounty cheating has been in several campaigns.

2.) This farm has been involved in merit abuse (admitted independently).

3.) be.open was engaged in account trading/changing/gifting check reference from suchmoon:

Please, do not speak for everyone. Thank you.

I totally agree, using alt accounts is not prohibited here nor lying about having an alt and this even doesn't deserves a negative tag.

The accusation made in the OP is even baseless as the campaign they were participating in did not have any such rules, and even if it had it was better handled by the manager of the campaign by kicking the participant out and not by some DT tags.

---

I think they are more concerned about your reason for the tags, as all of them are BS. As LoyceV said, adding alts to trust list is not an trust abuse.

I see and in case of scammers I totally agree. But beopen is not a scammer, he is respected member. It looks for me more that he is pursued by group of members, which were judging him earlier and still can not forget him, even if he was already painted and almost disapeared from the forum.

It's not an abuse to give mass negative if it's a proven scammer, sometimes it's better to do so as the DT network is very dynamic now and the feedbacks can jump between trusted and untrusted after monthly DT1 updates by theymos.

So you can just ~ him. suchmoon has already given him negative feedback for this. Is leaving mass negative feedbacks for the same thing not an abuse?

I will translate your post into Ru local.


Given the context of other actions of this farm, this is a rather serious abuse. Thanks for the link, I will post in that topic so that this farm is excluded from the vote.


Perhaps after theymos expels this farm from the vote, it would be wise to change the feedbacks of this "trick" to neutral, but not earlier. There are a lot of scammers in Ru local and we are just trying to protect ourselves from them (be.open DT1 this month) 


Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that comparing the actions of obviously honest users with the actions of a fraudster and also out of context cannot lead us to reasonable conclusions.

I noticed the similarities when I updated Users who Created or Wiped their Trust list - weekly data, and was notified about this Russian post a bit later. Unfortunately, I can't read Russian, Google Translate is not ideal to read 2 pages of posts, and I can't post in Russian so I'll respond in this topic. Since my data collection is being used to hand out negative feedback, I hope someone will transfer my concerns to the Russian topic too.

The only "abuse" that happens by adding an alt-account to your Trust list, is influencing DT1 voting. If that's a concern, open a topic in Meta so theymos can exclude them from DT1-voting.

Including your own alt-account(s) on your Trust list means nothing more than trusting the feedback left by those accounts. It's not the same as leaving yourself positive feedback, in which case I would agree it's Trust abuse.
In this case, however, I can't say it is abuse. It's quite useless to do though, because one account only left one neutral feedback, and the other account didn't leave any at all, but that's a mistake many users make when they create their own custom Trust list.

To prove my point:

I wouldn't call hilariousandco and DarkStar_ Trust abusers for adding their alt-account to their Trust list.

So we have a farm of connected accounts:

be.open, Sancho18, sne.su, Prod, Kutkh, Bonanzabits, more^power.

http://loyce.club/trust/2019-12-28_Sat_06.13h/986242.html - be.open
http://loyce.club/trust/2019-12-28_Sat_06.13h/1018592.html - Sancho18
http://loyce.club/trust/2019-12-28_Sat_06.13h/1077612.html - sne.su


CTRL+C CTRL+V =


Conclusion: trust abuse.

A curious strategy. I hope that while he is desperately rummaging through my story in search of the next batch of shit, he will at least get a little insight into the meaning of my old messages and will cease to be a bitcoin hater and a nocoiner. Maybe at least some benefit will be from this tightened farce. We'll see.

ps By the way, how do you know about his strategy?

KTChampions always uses a killer strategy: he gives out part of the compromising information known to him and when the defendant naively gives a false excuse, KTChampions gives another (not all) part, convicting the first excuse of lying and this continues until the victim is completely discredited.

In this case, KTChampions in addition scoffs at LoyceV's hypocrisy )

The sne.su account was not hacked by bruteforce, it was social hacking, I already gave the explanations above. When I found out, I was able to restore the course of events and regain control. The compromised password was changed by me for security reasons. I reported it here.

The stylistic and semantic expertise of the history of posts can confirm the truth of my words. Even now, after regaining control over the account sne.su, there are some messages in its history that were not written by me. I left them because their content did not cause me an internal contradiction, although of course I would express them in a completely different form. And because I assumed that perhaps expertise would be required to prove the truth of my words. All the posts by sne.su from March 10, 2018 to September 02, 2018 were not written by me. But - I decided that let them be and took responsibility for their content, as for my own. Perhaps this decision is incorrect, and I am ready to clear the message history completely if necessary, leaving only my original messages. Tnx.

Nop, because there is no plagiarism, lovesmayfamilis was mistaken.

The only reasonable reason why you continue to procrastinate the closure of this topic is to support it in the top of the Reputation section and its title trying to slander me. I regard this as a false accusation and slander against me. Just stop it.

Ok.


The evidence is relevant. Merit abuse and cheating are proven.


Well, it follows that be.open should be banned for plagiarism that lovesmayfamilis found.


In addition to merit, there is a proven connection through used wallets.