Topic: BITCOINTALK STAFF QUIETLY BANS PEOPLE FOR SPEAKING OUT AGAINST THEM - page 2. (Read 7849 times)

It's always best to use the X-Files theory of trade on this forum.

You've been here 3 months, so you think your opinion holds more weight than mine? i have busted hero members red handed and they are still in the default trust.

If there is a scam accusation against someone on default trust with actual evidence then others (that is credible) then other people on default trust will give negative trust and the people that have previously trusted the account will remove such trust.

The people on default trust on not all part of some kind of collation or a gang, and will not necessarily trust or believe others on default trust if there is a reason not to.

Hyperbolic reply.  You take reasonable steps to prevent it such as deleting threads with the same effort that is used to delete what is considered spam or off-topic.  Then you warn people that accounts can be sold if it is a problem, you don't publically support account selling.  That make this site (and Bitcoin) look ridiculous and irresponsible and possibly even create a legal liability.  That is why you don't see this at most other forums.

SaltySpitoon, its a good post but we all know that politics relating to the trust system is what runs this community now. You can very easily bring to light the actions of a user not in the default trust, but the posters in the default trust have a pseudo immunity to scam accusations, to where they can do whatever they want and get away with it, because any negative trust they receive won't show up on their profile, and they can easily enlist fellow members in the default trust and use them to discredit their accusors through posting fraudulent trust ratings. its a pretty broken system in this aspect. It is my belief that only moderators and admins should be allowed into the default trust.

Well, to address a couple points here, first off, banning account selling is something that the Bitcointalk staff is not able to do. We can ban content (the example kiddy porn was used) because that is posted here, and we can delete the post and ban the poster. If you make 50 accounts on different tor nodes and then make a contact via pm or skype to sell the accounts, how exactly do you expect that we can stop that without spying through your pms and hacking your skype? By publicly allowing account selling, its not a surprise to anyone, so everyone has a bit of suspicion in them when dealing with someone. If we said we banned Account selling, then the majority of people who knew how to get around the system would be able to do more damage to unsuspecting people.

As far as the trust system goes, it is not flawless, people need to stop taking it as definitive proof of trust. It is essentially ebay feedback, past history does not guarantee future trustworthiness. However! Something that everyone seems to forget, is that your account and its history has financial value, and so does your trust. If I wanted to sell my account (I'm not going to) I would get a pretty hefty offer. My account valuation would be based on account age, past actions, future opportunities with my name, and my trust, plus various other things. A person can calculate how much money they can trust me worth, based on similar factors. If I have 50 positive feedback, people trusting me with 1 BTC, that doesn't magically mean I'm trustworthy with 50 BTC, perhaps 5 BTC, based on various calculations. If the valuation of what I'd sell my account for is based on my trust value + other factors, it doesn't make economical sense for someone to buy my account for 20+ BTC (the combination of financial factors) and then to scam for just the value of my trust. Now of course that isn't foolproof, but its a heavy incentive not to buy trust heavy accounts and scam with them. Buying accounts with the intention to scam is frankly a gamble. If you get caught after paying a hefty sum for a valuable account, you are out a bunch of money. Perhaps it is more valuable to play it straight and sign up for sig campaigns, invest in business opportunities, etc.

Anyway, I'm not justifying account selling, I'm not in denial, and sure it can be used to scam, but if you actually do the math, sometimes there can be legit reasons to buy accounts. But, thats all moot anyway, because we can't stop it either way.

As far as the censorship goes, only global moderators or admins can ban people. "Silent bans" tend to happen in full view of all of the moderators by public request of a moderator who can't ban someone personally. This isn't a decentralized forum, if you want a decentralized forum, make one.

And really, by the way, it is a very very common occurrence for people to cry censorship, try to make a martyr out of themselves by declaring that they will be banned for their views, and then get themselves banned for spamming/completely unrelated reasons to prove a point. There is no rule that says you can't voice your outrage at policies here, and as long as you aren't being overly abusive, you are welcome to criticize everything we do. Just put your complaints in the right sections, and it would be very well appreciated if you are actually looking for an answer / a change rather than just trying to pick a fight to prove a point.

It's no coincidence that Blazr has logged in to leave me negative feedback, now is it 

Aww, since the account was banned, I can't see the outbox.

The situation was:

Blazr was caught replying to his thread, as Blazr, under the BTCTalkAccounts account.

A few people noticed it and posted about that.

(BTCTalkAccounts is responsible for various phishing sites on Bitcointalk, and lots of hacked accounts.)

Blazr extorted and bribed the people that noticed it to delete their quotes.

More interestingly, the password for BTCTalkAccounts is the same password for Blazr.



When I looked in BTCTalkAccounts's account, he had already deleted the earlier PMs. I still have the rest of the PMs, which is.. fairly interesting, especially since a certain member is now staff here.

----------

To answer your question: No, mlawrence (Vod) wasn't the person that left negative feedback for the people who outed him.

It seems theymos wants his real name to be used so he can take credit for what he has done.  I agree with that, it is about time he stood up and takes responsibility.  Maybe there is still a chance he will turn into a regular person someday.


https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.130042

I think I have this document

One more indication the staff is conspiring to do this stuff.  Theymos runs a business so there is no issue with identifying the business and its owners. 

FYI, everyone who posts theymos's dox gets banned.

I post at least a few times a day and read 10x more than I post and I haven't seen anything like that. That doesn't mean it's not happening I'm just not aware of it. I only know of a few possible problems involving theymos at all. GLBSE, the default trust list, accepting ad money from BFL and the forum funds all have all had questionable outcomes in discussion but I never really saw any proof of wrongdoing. If you have some proof please post it. I'm just like a bitch, I love to read a good drama. Give me a harlequin romance novel and I'll curl up on the couch for an hour. lol

As far as the staff are concerned, some of them are shitheads, some of them are nice guys, some are probably here to pull a long con, some are probably here because they have a real love for Bitcoin, just like a cross section of people you meet anywhere in real life. Sometimes it's hard to judge what's really happening off of just forum posts. Some people have a tough time expressing themselves in writing and there will always be a missing bit of info that no one mentioned. That's why I try to go to as many conferences as possible. I want to get a real sense of who is in control of the businesses so I know who to trust.

Look at the feedback that Vod and cooldgamer left me. all for stipulating i would only trade with a hero or trusted member and we must trade feedback.

I try to bring people into Bitcoin and Theymos and his gang conspire to rip those people off as a welcoming message.  Then the staff comes on to ridicule the people that complain about it.  That is over the top and it is damaging to Bitcoin. 

the account resale is probably a non-issue as far as court claims since nobody has really identified a monetary loss.  However, it make Bitcoin look ridiculous to run the main forum like that.  It looks like a bunch of goofy teenagers who have no idea what they are doing and they even admit they think this is not the "real world."  What a bunch of goofballs. 

I'm done. There isn't anything left to say.

Edit: There is 1 thing left to say: I do appreciate the fact that I am able to read and post here.

I can question things and come to the conclusion that nothing wrong is happening. Questioning and paranoia are two different things. Let me ask you a question. The people that are being persecuted are of such high caliber and so well respected within the community that the only course of action was to crush their insolence? Somehow I find that hard to believe.

BTW: MnW, Bruno and I have talked so much shit about this forums mods and admin over the years that I would have banned us but it never happened. Most of the bans here happen for off topic trolling. Moonshadow, in particular, has shown remarkable restraint because I've given him loads of shit without breaking the rules and he never banned me.

Sorry if I think you're full of shit. Please carry on with your crusade.

@Help.org

Did theymos piss in your cornflakes? What's got you all crazy? It can't be this stupid non-issue, so what happened?

Have you checked out your user name lately bro?

Jesus the people on this forum are just ridiculous. This place just seems to breed paranoid kooks.