Then you don't know Matthew.
Well, not as well as you do obviously. I've missed you and Atlas more than you could imagine sweetie.
Bruce?
Oh damn! I'm outed.
The sweetie part was the tip
Topic: [CENSORSHIP] Matthew N. Wright - page 2. (Read 16408 times)
Well, not as well as you do obviously. I've missed you and Atlas more than you could imagine sweetie.
Bruce?
Oh damn! I'm outed.
The sweetie part was the tip
Then you don't know Matthew.
Well, not as well as you do obviously. I've missed you and Atlas more than you could imagine sweetie.
Bruce?
Oh damn! I'm outed.
Then you don't know Matthew.
Well, not as well as you do obviously. I've missed you and Atlas more than you could imagine sweetie.
Then you don't know Matthew.
I'm not Matthew, dumbass.
That's exactly what I would expect Matthew to say. lol
I'm so glad the asshole site admins kept marking Tradefortress as positive trust. You guys did a great job of befriending him while banishing matthew for speaking out.
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
If you aren't happy, you are welcome to leave
I'm not Matthew, dumbass.
I'm so glad the asshole site admins kept marking Tradefortress as positive trust. You guys did a great job of befriending him while banishing matthew for speaking out.
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
Hey Matthew, you're back! Yipeeeee
I'm so glad the asshole site admins kept marking Tradefortress as positive trust. You guys did a great job of befriending him while banishing matthew for speaking out.
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
Site admins are completely irresponsible (and hoarding millions of $ in user donations).
clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap, clap
If the person doesn't do anything that is illegal, why do you have to ban at all?
Because they are disrupting topics. Even if you have someone on ignore, enough people reply to them that you will either need to ignore those people or put up with it. Those are the people that we ban. As long as you aren't disruptive, we probably won't bother. This is complete and utter bullshit and just paints all you mods who are trying to White Knight for Theymos as scummy sycophants. You can't ban someone for trolling and leave Crumbs to post. That proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ban is not for trolling, which makes the ban for personal reasons.
Since I was the one to initially put in the request, I feel that I can disclose this. Crumbs has already been temp banned in the past and is currently on the chopping block for a permanent ban.So everyone you have an issue with your just going to temp ban and then permanent ban... If the person doesn't do anything that is illegal, why do you have to ban at all? It just shows you are not doing a good job in moderating if you just ban people. Let the community decided with the ignore button if they want someone to be ban someone from their view. It is funny how a forum about software that frees you so much, yet this is becoming like so strict to be here. I just can't wait until the day I come here and I have to pay to view the forum. I know it is coming, bitcoin foundation is bleeding into this forum.
Also I think if Matthew N. Wright is banned for scams, when is TF going to get the ban? Alright he is Theymos' buddy that is why.
This whole forum is a joke, if it wasn't for the 70K+ members and the deep pockets of some people I would have leave along time ago.
This is complete and utter bullshit and just paints all you mods who are trying to White Knight for Theymos as scummy sycophants. You can't ban someone for trolling and leave Crumbs to post. That proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ban is not for trolling, which makes the ban for personal reasons.
Since I was the one to initially put in the request, I feel that I can disclose this. Crumbs has already been temp banned in the past and is currently on the chopping block for a permanent ban. 
There is a difference between trolling and being abusive/destructive.
It is a very fine line and I'm glad I'm not the judge here, I don't know what I would do. But I will say in my opinion, Matthew N. Wright, the psychopathic repetitive scammer gone, makes the BTC world a better place. He has done far more harm than good to this community.
That being said I think everyone should be able to speak their minds as long as they do not harm others. Editing the results of a poll to make it look like people voted for something they did not really vote for, in my mind seems counterproductive and goes against the values of free speech.
Could the forum hire a mod just to follow him around and keep him from scamming and being abusive? It sure could. But the real question is, should it?
It is a very fine line and I'm glad I'm not the judge here, I don't know what I would do. But I will say in my opinion, Matthew N. Wright, the psychopathic repetitive scammer gone, makes the BTC world a better place. He has done far more harm than good to this community.
That being said I think everyone should be able to speak their minds as long as they do not harm others. Editing the results of a poll to make it look like people voted for something they did not really vote for, in my mind seems counterproductive and goes against the values of free speech.
Could the forum hire a mod just to follow him around and keep him from scamming and being abusive? It sure could. But the real question is, should it?
This is borderline libel/slander. I trust MNW more than 99% of people on this forum because of his actions.
Dude makes a foolish bet causing himself to owe others tens of thousands of dollars that he was never prepared to pay...and to this day he is still honoring his debt.
MNW has more balls than you'll ever have. And I follow your posts rather closely, fyi. I have for some time.
What part of it was slander? Psychopath part? Okay, Fine I'm not a Dr... He might not really be a psychopath.
His "joke" that cost people a shit load of bitcoin while he helped pirate get rid of his debt at a much higher than maker price is not even what I'm talking about when I said he was a scammer. The guy has been tagged more than once and been involved in all sorts of dirty shit and scams.
Also honoring his debt? Admitting he had a debt was a deal he made with theymos to get his scammer tag off. Has he paid anything since then? Lol. You are a funny guy. He owes shit loads and is not making payments.
Yes.
Editing the results of a poll to make it look like people voted for something they did not really vote for, in my mind seems counterproductive and goes against the values of free speech.
Or it just points out you're using a broken, untrustworthy, tool as a decision maker.
From what I read, MNW has been doing his share to promote BTC. What can you brag about? Posting pictures of you and Josh having fun?
There is a difference between trolling and being abusive/destructive.
It is a very fine line and I'm glad I'm not the judge here, I don't know what I would do. But I will say in my opinion, Matthew N. Wright, the psychopathic repetitive scammer gone, makes the BTC world a better place. He has done far more harm than good to this community.
That being said I think everyone should be able to speak their minds as long as they do not harm others. Editing the results of a poll to make it look like people voted for something they did not really vote for, in my mind seems counterproductive and goes against the values of free speech.
Could the forum hire a mod just to follow him around and keep him from scamming and being abusive? It sure could. But the real question is, should it?
It is a very fine line and I'm glad I'm not the judge here, I don't know what I would do. But I will say in my opinion, Matthew N. Wright, the psychopathic repetitive scammer gone, makes the BTC world a better place. He has done far more harm than good to this community.
That being said I think everyone should be able to speak their minds as long as they do not harm others. Editing the results of a poll to make it look like people voted for something they did not really vote for, in my mind seems counterproductive and goes against the values of free speech.
Could the forum hire a mod just to follow him around and keep him from scamming and being abusive? It sure could. But the real question is, should it?
This is borderline libel/slander. I trust MNW more than 99% of people on this forum because of his actions.
Dude makes a foolish bet causing himself to owe others tens of thousands of dollars that he was never prepared to pay...and to this day he is still honoring his debt.
MNW has more balls than you'll ever have. And I follow your posts rather closely, fyi. I have for some time.
troll checking in here. swooping down from reddit (or is it up). first login since this forum got took for another cosbycoin ride.
this place is toxic and it's funny that the mnw show continues.
this place is toxic and it's funny that the mnw show continues.
Hi jcpham, sup?
Ontopic:
I am still thinking that if MNW really got banned for trolling, many more should've been banned too. And perma(?)banned for trolling, really? Please just tell us it was personal reasons as it looks like it was. If it wasn't for personal reasons, tell us the real reason.
Quote
I don't know why anyone is surprised by this though. This is just libertarians showing their true colours. What part of money = power do people not understand about that horrible philosophy?
As an Anarchist leaning Libertarian I resent that, if people would come over to my website to chat I'd probably never ban them unless they were just copy/paste spamming or posting virus'
this is why ignore/block functions exist, I don't know why an admin would need to resort to banning if they already have the right functions in place. You often even see people in games and stuff ranting about someone that's pissing them off while completely failing to notice they have a perfectly good block function available, facebook is a classic example because it's even devolved to people bitching to newspapers about it which is pathetic.To be fair though, this is exactly why I would rather be an honest person without any morals than a corrupt hypocrite with morals.
Matthew N. Wright's problem is that he's not a brony.
This is complete and utter bullshit and just paints all you mods who are trying to White Knight for Theymos as scummy sycophants. You can't ban someone for trolling and leave Crumbs to post.
Crumbs is cute.
troll checking in here. swooping down from reddit (or is it up). first login since this forum got took for another cosbycoin ride.
this place is toxic and it's funny that the mnw show continues.
this place is toxic and it's funny that the mnw show continues.
Jump to: