Pages:
Author

Topic: Censorship on Bitcointalk - page 2. (Read 9323 times)

legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
October 22, 2012, 03:10:59 PM
#72
Trolls from that place should not be allowed to besmirch the good name of Rarity.

newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
October 22, 2012, 02:38:01 PM
#71
Quote
No shit, Sherlock...  
If it wasn't for you telling us Raize is a goon we would never suspect...

My point was in regards to the moderators "evidence" against Rarity.  They should not be using secret evidence from their paysite to be moderating this free forum.

It is troubling that so many members of that forum such as Raize, including moderators here, are vocal opponents of Rarity.  I am glad you are starting to see things my way.  Trolls from that place should not be allowed to besmirch the good name of Rarity or act as moderators here.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
October 22, 2012, 02:37:12 PM
#70
He also went on to make a total mockery of the scammer tag system:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-dank-117590
(it was subsequently seconded)

Normally, if that's all a person did trolling wise, that'd be alright. However, this has been a pattern for Rarity and this forum has really just seen enough. Making that thread that I mentioned really was what broke the camel's back for me. Prior to that, Rarity was only being destructive to meaningful conversation in a few threads, but making that thread broke the containment.

Umm The "scammer tag" was a mockery the moment that intersango/bitcoinica/zhoutong did not get a scammer tag.  Rarity's thread looked like a legitimate request over an unfulfilled obligation.

As for the "Rarity = goon" conspiracy, from what I read, even the goons don't think Rarity's a goon.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
October 22, 2012, 02:35:29 PM
#69
You have zero evidence Rarity is a troll, only speculation.  Rarity appears to me to be a fan of Bitcoin and a long time member here who never trolled.   This "Something Awful" site is behind a paywall, the only way you could possibly see what is happening there is if you yourself are a member.

Members of that forum are trolling with Rarity as their target, and you have just revealed yourself to be one of them.

No shit, Sherlock... Roll Eyes
If it wasn't for you telling us Raize is a goon we would never suspect...

...
The better SA goons that actually do their own research and discovery have just accepted Bitcoin for what it is and moved on, or like me, are sometimes finding active scammers.
...
I love SA, been a member there for over a decade
...
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
Its as easy as 0, 1, 1, 2, 3
October 22, 2012, 02:11:57 PM
#68
newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
October 22, 2012, 02:11:29 PM
#67
Wow, that makes a lot more sense now.  The moderators of the forum could obviously see something over there too, which proves they are members as well.  Why are the moderators joining up with this other forum to troll members like Rarity?
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
October 22, 2012, 02:08:57 PM
#66
You have zero evidence Rarity is a troll, only speculation.  Rarity appears to me to be a fan of Bitcoin and a long time member here who never trolled.   This "Something Awful" site is behind a paywall, the only way you could possibly see what is happening there is if you yourself are a member.

Members of that forum are trolling with Rarity as their target, and you have just revealed yourself to be one of them.
donator
Activity: 1419
Merit: 1015
October 22, 2012, 02:02:49 PM
#65
Most of the recent SA goons, probably due to a lack of actual technical skills and intelligence, are spending more effort trolling lately than actually finding and exposing scammers, so they have to focus instead on criticizing theymos. The better SA goons that actually do their own research and discovery have just accepted Bitcoin for what it is and moved on, or like me, are sometimes finding active scammers. The only ones still left focusing on trolling are actively trolling in bands. Make no mistake, the OP is just another goon trying to rile up a posse for a witchunt.

I love SA, been a member there for over a decade, but the Bitcoin thread there is full of a bunch of teenagers or unemployed twenty-somethings with zero economic experience and vendettas against "lolbertarians". They are so full of themselves they think the teenagers and unemployed twenty-somethings on *this* forum (read: Atlas) represent the entirety of Bitcoin when they say things like "It crashed because people ran out of money to support the price, but SomethingAwful got blamed."

In actuality, very few people purchased at $20 or above, but if you were to take a few of these interpretations from Something Awful members, all of us were buying at that point over a year ago. I really wish they'd just tone down the rhetoric, but when they can spend all day posting nonsense and trying to make villains out of forum regulars and think they are making headway, why wouldn't they? Banning Rarity is a "meh". I wouldn't mind seeing a few more banned just to watch them get pissy about it and cry about evil theymos censorship in the SA thread. It's fun to watch their reactions. If they are enjoying reading this forum and loling, we might as well get a kick out of reading theirs!

EDIT: Worth noting, I found out about Bitcoin independent of SA, first in late 2009 and again when it was actually worth something in 2010. I consider myself a "goon" about as much as I consider myself a "BitcoinTalker", but I suppose since I *do* have an account I can pretend to hate Atlas or Dank or whoever it is the SA thread is currently targeting if it helps me fit the present profile Tongue. I just can't dedicate tens of posts a day to ridiculing people since I actually have a day job and just post here at night and over lunch.
newbie
Activity: 27
Merit: 0
October 22, 2012, 12:39:29 PM
#64
Quote
Meh.  It's a web site.  The owners have full dictatorial rights over whatever is posted here and don't have to answer to anyone for it.

Of course they do, like with the scammer tag the law has nothing to do with this, it's a matter of honor to maintain a forum with free speech when you claim to be doing so.

Quote
No, "we" cannot. I am not you and I do not agree with your assertion. It is quite misleading. If there was no reason or evidence to initiate the discussion, I would agree on a false premise. But this was not the case.

Of course you disagree, and you should not be criticized for defending yourself or a fellow poster from false accusations as you are doing with Rarity.  

Quote
No, "psychology" was not the subject, neither was regulated markets. The psychology of a con man was the subject. Just because the thread tittle have the psychology word, it does not mean the subject was about psychology. Moreover, lack of moderation is not absence of evidence.

The name Zhou Tong was in the title, you don't get to pretend it was not about him.  You are being dishonest and absurd, the discussion assumed his guilt and was examining his psychology.  Read the thread.

Quote
Irrelevant. The subject in discussion is Rarity unnecessary posts. Only because mlawrence was moderated, it does not mean Rarity did not made misleading statements.

The unnecessary posts in question were pointing out the need for moderation of death threats.  You can't find any real examples because they don't exist.

Quote
Your claim still remains false and with no evidence to support it.

A request for evidence is not a claim.

Quote
User Rarity was an obvious troll from the start. When discussing Bitcoin, they would replace Bitcoin with their imaginary centralized freezable currency and continue the discussion as if it was actually Bitcoin they were talking about. When faced with obvious questions about how their pretend currency was vastly different (mining isn't necessary, what happens when miners process blacklisted transactions, et cetera) than Bitcoin, they would simply evade and ignore, knowing an actual response would tear down their house of cards.

Another false accusation.  Rarity appears to have been talking about regulation of people using Bitcoin and repeatedly pointed out she would not regulate the currency itself in any way.  That all the criticisms of Rarity seem to be based on lies is not making a good case the ban was not crooked.

Quote
Let me counter all of your retarded conspiracy theories with a post of mine from the moderator forum way back from July, where I am suggesting the ban of Rarity.

Quote from: Blitz­ on July 27, 2012, 01:54:14 PM
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/rarity-43081

Troll from SA, mentioned somewhere in the late pages of this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3486823

Though it's really obvious anyway.

Let me get this straight, the only evidence you have of this accusation is something I have to pay $10 to see?  And you are calling me retarded for not believing your hidden evidence?  Why do you have no facts you can actually share with us?

Quote
Rarity, for trolling. All he's been doing is wasting everyone's time. He never listens to reason, even to the point where most of our regular trolls give up:
Quote from: MPOE-PR on October 10, 2012, 04:14:15 PM
I'm happy with this. Far as we're concerned the matter may rest.
Quote from: Rarity on October 10, 2012, 04:01:16 PM
Quote
I'm not going to keep responding to these ridiculous accusations based on rumors and assumptions.

Sounds like you just admitted to them all, just with the caveat that you were going to stop the lies and lies of omissions later if you got a sucker on the hook.  Sure you would have.  Sure!
He also went on to make a total mockery of the scammer tag system:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-dank-117590

It's to the point that I can only believe that he is doing this on purpose. Theymos, I know that you have a conflict of interest here because Rarity has been debating you regarding GLBSE, so feel free to let him know that I made this request. Also, if someone else could second this, that'd be great.

This is a clear admission Rarity was banned for criticizing Theymos.  Rarity made that post in response to Theymos admitting he did not reveal everything in his sale post, and claiming that he would have done so later in the sale.  Why the hell should an unbiased observer take Theymos at his word on that?  The only evidence of Rarity "not seeing reason" is not believing Theymos?  Who wanted GLBSE to remain an illegal market?  Who is now doing nothing but sniping from the sidelines while Nefario sends out refunds?

And why is Rarity making a mockery of the scammer tag system by complaining that a written contract on these forums was broken?  It seems more a mockery that Dank was allowed to get away with it and continues to solicit donations towards his music as if he were capable of playing any.

And if "mocking the scammer tag system" is worthy of banning, do you intend to ban dank for turning the thread about his deceptive breach of contract into a discussion of how illegal drugs cure cancer which is caused by a weak soul?

Of course not, you are just making a weak excuse for being caught red handed trying to shut down a critic of the administrator. 

Quote
Normally, if that's all a person did trolling wise, that'd be alright. However, this has been a pattern for Rarity and this forum has really just seen enough. Making that thread that I mentioned really was what broke the camel's back for me. Prior to that, Rarity was only being destructive to meaningful conversation in a few threads, but making that thread broke the containment.

And yet when asked to share any evidence of trolling, all you can do is point to some offsite forum behind a paywall?

Quote
What a ridiculous thread. So much bother over a 7 day ban. I’ve banned myself from this forum for a week or more at a time for my own sanity.

Moderators, was it a 7 day ban?  I haven't seen Rarity logged in or posting since.
legendary
Activity: 916
Merit: 1003
October 20, 2012, 12:29:37 PM
#63
It would be way cooler if the forum was decentralized and everyone could be a part of moderating the forum.
Things like reputation systems on all accounts (where other users can leave feedback behind about a user) would improve the forum I find.

You sound like you're volunteering.   Cool
member
Activity: 114
Merit: 10
Bitcoin = Money for the people, by the people.
October 19, 2012, 03:56:58 PM
#62
It would be way cooler if the forum was decentralized and everyone could be a part of moderating the forum.
Things like reputation systems on all accounts (where other users can leave feedback behind about a user) would improve the forum I find.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1015
October 18, 2012, 08:01:04 PM
#61
...
I surprised nobody posted this, given that I explicitly said that people could say that I was the one who requested the ban...

I read it as you giving permission to Theymos to disclose it to Rarity, not to someone else to disclose it to other forum users.
I suppose. I never figured a thread would pop up.  Undecided
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1002
October 18, 2012, 07:58:24 PM
#60
...
I surprised nobody posted this, given that I explicitly said that people could say that I was the one who requested the ban...

I read it as you giving permission to Theymos to disclose it to Rarity, not to someone else to disclose it to other forum users.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1015
October 18, 2012, 07:25:10 PM
#59
Every time I saw a Rarity post I knew it would be incendiary and would contribute no value to the discussion.
And that is the exact reason why Rarity was banned. That was made clear through an overall view of Rarity's posts, and especially recent ones. Three out of the 10 reported posts against Rarity were moderated. Rarity had also been previously brought up for being banned, as well as warned. Not to mention, Rarity had an orange ignore button (this isn't directly used against people, but it can be used as contributory evidence).

I surprised nobody posted this, given that I explicitly said that people could say that I was the one who requested the ban, but here is the particular request I made:

Rarity, for trolling. All he's been doing is wasting everyone's time. He never listens to reason, even to the point where most of our regular trolls give up:
I'm happy with this. Far as we're concerned the matter may rest.
Quote
I'm not going to keep responding to these ridiculous accusations based on rumors and assumptions.

Sounds like you just admitted to them all, just with the caveat that you were going to stop the lies and lies of omissions later if you got a sucker on the hook.  Sure you would have.  Sure!
He also went on to make a total mockery of the scammer tag system:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/scammer-dank-117590

It's to the point that I can only believe that he is doing this on purpose. Theymos, I know that you have a conflict of interest here because Rarity has been debating you regarding GLBSE, so feel free to let him know that I made this request. Also, if someone else could second this, that'd be great.
(it was subsequently seconded)

Normally, if that's all a person did trolling wise, that'd be alright. However, this has been a pattern for Rarity and this forum has really just seen enough. Making that thread that I mentioned really was what broke the camel's back for me. Prior to that, Rarity was only being destructive to meaningful conversation in a few threads, but making that thread broke the containment.

Again, there was no problem with any single post (except for a few here and there that were dealt with), rather it was the overall picture that resulted in the ban.
N12
donator
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1010
October 17, 2012, 08:00:06 AM
#58
Let me counter all of your retarded conspiracy theories with a post of mine from the moderator forum way back from July, where I am suggesting the ban of Rarity.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/rarity-43081

Troll from SA, mentioned somewhere in the late pages of this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3486823

Though it's really obvious anyway.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
October 17, 2012, 05:36:55 AM
#57
Generally equity owners (not be confused with directors, executives, employees, officers) are not held liable for the actions of the company

Shareholders, no, but what about partners and officers like Theymos?


Quote
Illegal implies it was against the law, and presently we still do not know if GLBSE was against the law in any jurisdiction.

There is no legal weight to the argument that Bitcoins = Get Out of Jail Free.  The securities themselves are regulated regardless of what they are traded for.  

Quote
Again, I don't see the logic in the accusations; theymos (et al) were very straightforward with what was being sold and why they were selling it.

No, they were not.  

Quote
So you admit that anyone intending to buy knew what they were going to be purchasing. Thanks

No, folks here do not realize what Theymos did, that the illegality made the shares worthless.  You yourself, in fact, just acknowledged you do not accept that fact.  Theymos does, which is why he dumped the shares on the rubes and knew to get out as soon as the authorities were involved.  


Mods or not, the people posting BS excuses and clear untruths instead of being open or just saying you don't know, are really looking bad here.

This is my last post on the subject, I have no direct interest in this situation and am just posting my opinions as an outside observer. I hope you guys clean this shit up, this board is too important to lose credibility over this.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
October 17, 2012, 05:23:10 AM
#56
I don't know Rarity, but reading his recent posts, I have to agree this banning is sketchy. I like this forum and don't want to get banned, but I don't see how it's wrong to discuss whether or not the owners of GLBSE are responsible for what is owed. I am not going to wade into that argument, I didn't lose much from GLBSE, but it seems extremely strange to ban someone who is raising these questions, and then blame it on months old posts in some thread no one cared about at the time. Not to mention... was he banned for suggesting that regulation can be a positive thing? Or for getting off topic in a thread where the OP was discussing philosophy? I didn't know that those were offenses.

If the consensus of the board moderators is that GLBSE owners other than nefario hold no responsibility, and that continuing to discuss this issue is not allowed, why not just say that? They control this board and have the power to decide what is allowed here, we all (almost all) understand and accept that. Banning someone and then being clearly dishonest as to the reason, making a huge reach to claim it was for months old posts, really hurts the credibility and appearance of openness of this board, which sucks because this is the best BTC resource by far. Again this is your board and you can do as you wish, but it makes you look silly to suggest that this user would have been banned for these old "regulation" posts if he had not posted about GLBSE this week. Just man up and say no talking about mods owing money.

Please don't ban me, just giving my 0.02 BTC.
full member
Activity: 215
Merit: 101
October 15, 2012, 08:15:37 AM
#55
Good riddance. He/she/it was so annoying that I feel like any other member using Frienship is Magic pony avatars should be banned as well.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1000
October 14, 2012, 03:15:37 PM
#54
Moderators needs to do what is best for Bitcointalk and Bitcoin, not for their personal interests.

Moderators do not need to do what is "best for Bitcoin".  This is not an official forum for the promotion of Bitcoin and nor does it pretend to be.  While there may be many discussions here which portray Bitcoin in a bad light, the answer is not to demand that the nature of this forum be changed so that Bitcoin is portrayed in a falsely positive light - it's to create on online presence with a different purpose.
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
October 14, 2012, 06:13:48 AM
#53
There is no official Bitcoin forum.
Pages:
Jump to: