Topic: Conflict of Interest on DT1 - page 5. (Read 2732 times)

The Pharmacist was added back into DT as a result of hilariousandco's inclusion. Don't try to create a false equivalence here with "second chances". OgNasty, Blazed, Tomatocage and hilariousandco all have their own opinions on where The Pharmacist belongs. But don't consider it a "second chance" if the user who added him back into DT wasn't part of the initial inclusion.

Don't equate neutral/positive trust to DT status. Completely separate things.

Dear actmyname ,
So The pharmacist no longer tag shitposters but HE USED TO TAG. So he is given back DT status

We wrote in Auction section to inquire about a sold account buy stuff, and now we dont do it.  So why we are not giving a second chance like Pharmacist ?

Shame on all your arguments.....

As pointed out by actmyname, I don't do that anymore, nor am I going to give fresh negatives for merit abusers.  That's per Theymos and the feedback I've gotten.  Scammers and account sellers still deserve a negative, though.

You shitposters don't seem to realize that this forum might not even exist other than as a spam forum if you guys keep up with your antics.  I don't want to imagine what the forum would be like without the people I have in my trust list.  It would not be the same, and it probably would not be a forum I'd want to visit.  What should happen is that campaigns ought to pay for post in the local sections, where you can at least be understood and you might have more to say.

The fact is that except for a few instances where users have actually posted their location in their profile or have specifically written where they're from, I don't know where anybody here is from.  When I say "3rd world shitposter", I'm saying that more out of how these posts read than my knowledge of whence they originated.  And somehow 100s of them end up sounding very, very similar on a daily basis.  I don't literally want anyone starving to death, but nor do I want this forum to be ended because people are here just to post garbage--and I'm confident that the posts I've reported, the shitposters I've tagged in the past, and you fools I'm debating with are the problem.  And I have a hard time believing that only bitcointalk can stand in the way of someone eating.  Could happen, sure, but you'd think those people would be a lot more motivated to not be lazy.  Or crafty enough not to get caught.  

I sleep with a clean conscience about this stuff.

Right on.  Or, as Vod has said, it's like these shitposters are at a job interview and after every question the interviewer asks--about qualifications, experience, etc., the shitposter says  "Because I need the job".

They should work. Sob stories can be created by anyone and the use of emotional appeal is not something that should influence one's decision.

---

The Pharmacist no longer tags shitposters, but regardless of if someone is in a third-world country or if their region has a low average income, shitposting should not be tolerated. You don't get a free pass because you rely on the forum for money. And you don't get a free pass because you don't know English well enough—that's just absurd. It would be like me trying to work as a mathematician and doing basic algebra, saying that I don't know anything advanced because I am disadvantaged.

...yeah, that's not how it works.

I forgot about the new forum rule that says you are only allowed to read posts from after your account was created. (/s)

LOL..!! So anyone who calls your bullshit is a part of the "Trust circle" now?? You are just slinging mud on everyone randomly and waiting to see what sticks.

You are a perfect example of the proverbial pig in the mud. Done replying to you. Putting you on ignore.

I sent a PM to Blazed 36 hours before sending a PM to you, if you want to change this, please send 0.00208333 BTC to 3BDMF7bFyVCrTpPe76tMGjywV7meWnEf4E (owned by theymos) which will grant me copper member status, and I will send you a PM every time I post in this thread. The delay in sending you a PM was also due to the assumption that you will see this thread about you and would respond accordingly.

The way I see your refusal to respond to this thread, including after acknowledging you had been made aware of this thread privately, and only responding (if you call your post a response) after it was made public that you are aware of this thread, is that you wanted to pretend you were not aware of this thread to avoid addressing the uncomfortable concerns about your history and your business practices.

Who would have thought that a trust farming, begging, account seller would be a part of a trust circle?

There is the serious accusation that you are participating in Red Tagging your competitors in the account trading business, among other things, such as trust farming.

Why exactly have you failed to Red Tag several members in Blazed's trust list who have clearly traded forum accounts in the past, when you Red Tag others who do the very same thing?

Are you trying to prevent forum accounts from being sold by others while allowing accounts be sold by those within your circle? If you claim to not currently sell accounts, when exactly did you stop? Why?

If you believe this, I would point you to this post by Lauda, and correct him in saying the OP of that thread should post from his main account. Or do you only have this opinion when someone is posting anonymously pointing out things that expose your not-so-squeaky-clean past? 

I think this guy might disagree with you. It seems you left him a Red Tag because he posted some concerns about you. Some people might say you have a pretty thin skin, and cannot handle criticism.

yahoo62278 literally provided no evidence, nor claimed to have any evidence of who I am posting on behalf of, yet you say you know exactly who is behind this thread, and are outraged. Color me suspicious.

I think both yahoo62278 and yourself do not want to answer to the uncomfortable concerns raised in this thread. Even though I have posted clear and concise evidence that yahoo62278 and others in Blazed's trust list have traded accounts in the past, you refuse to Red Tag these people. Why is this? I think blazed is in the center of a trust farming ring, who protects account sellers within his ring. Your prior posts imply you are unwilling and/or unable to backup your Red Tags based on their merits, and rely on the weakness of those you have Red Tagged.

You claim to know what has happened in 2016 (including when something started), yet you created your account in mid-2017. You are the second account (amishmanish was the first) to have this very same discrepancy. Color me suspicious.

One might even go as far as to say the sock puppets within the trust circle are out in full force protecting the trust circle.

It's funny how people are attempting to form a sort of pressure group to keep pushing for:

1. Changes to the merit system
2. Taking away DT status from members like Lauda, actmyname, Pharmacist etc who give negative rating to spammers.

Welcome to democracy and class-wars in the age of information. Where I want my pedestrian, uniformed "opinion" to hold as much weight as an expert's, well-researched advice. Because well, I too have twitter and facebook and can get 5000 like me to follow me. LOL.. 

Thoughts on Account Dealing: My identity on the forum is pretty much an open book. I joined to learn and see what this awesome place has to offer. I was fascinated that developers like Hal Finney, Maxwell, Gavin, Mike Hearn and the lot, even Satoshi himself posted here. the 10,000 BTC pizza started here. I didn't know enough to care much about anonymity.

Now when i think of it, If i wanted to really do something to help people in BTC usage, I'd like to be anonymous. But if i start a business with a newbie account, can i hope to hit the ground running?? No. It'll take longer. In that case, i could think about looking for an anonymous, established identity here. I think those are the lines along which someone wanting to buy an account in 2015-16 would have thought. Anonymity has its own advantages if you want to be constructive but unfortunately, it is a double-edged sword, much like cryptography.

Account dealers just saw the opportunity at that time but it morphed into something much more vicious when people started buying accounts to wield DT power or to simply turn them into Zombie accounts for Bounty stakes.

I know. I think you continue showing the identifiable trait of taking things out of context and using them as "proof". This is typical behavior from someone with an agenda. You willfully ignore the part of my reply that mattered and the basis on which anybody reading that thread would form an opinion.

"I see just some member account being over-enthusiastic and doing the reddit inspired "Help me out" guys."

Are you feigning stupidity to divert or are actually stupid enough to ask this. People read Dear Sir.

From your patronizing responses, (Trying to school me about "begging not allowed"; Implying that as one of the "2017" accounts, I shouldn't have any clue about bitcoin's/ forum's history) it is pretty much clear you are an alt-account with an agenda. You simply refuse to engage and just want to malign people who, I must now assume, are rivals who have possibly taken away/ damaged your business/ reputation.

I too wouldn't agree with a lot of old members doing business here. Lot of the managers have enabled the ICO Spam that is giving cryptos a bad name and have enriched themselves on the way. But again, this is all pretty recent phenomena. If they were to become more responsible about whom they choose to support, It'll just be an evolutionary glitch.

The issue is that it's quite difficult to implement a forum-wide policy when scammers are willing to pay quite a lot to pull off a scam. The managers can't  be too judgmental only to lose their business to someone else willing to look the other way. Maybe those are the kind of tricky issues that need to be solved by people who have gained from this forum in the past. That may include people like you who are wasting their energies and everyone else's time in such mutually destructive debates.

If you are an old account whose conscience hasn't been completely overtaken by the mathematics of "BTC/USD conversion rate" then please try to be positive and constructive. Stop playing these power games, look at the bigger picture where this forum has played an amazing role in moving things forward for the bitcoin ecosystem. Stop damaging it with these stupidities.

Since 2015 this group of DT Members created scammers

Before 2017 the forum did not have a subforum to trade accounts now it has a subforum : https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/hacked-invitesaccounts-are-not-allowed-1785577  I still think Account delears should never be trusted .

If this guy is Quickseller (Quickscammer). It seems like he's not giving up to drag down DT1 members since 2016 isn't? It seems like he really got some personal principles.

Vod, you know it's him. LOL.

Hmm, the OP used "sir".  When have you know Quickscammer to respect anybody?

Except of course, pretending to respect what I say to get more attention.

The owner of this thread is... You guessed it... Quickscammer! 

Oh, you mean like a famously disgraced member here who has a long history of playing out his vendettas with alt accounts and beating dead-horse issues that he seems convinced people will care about if only he makes enough noise?  Yeah, I got that impression as well after reading his last few replies.  

Give it up, QS, it's obvious.  I was initially fooled and responded to you even though I was pretty sure you were an alt of someone else, but now it's pretty obvious this is just another one of your alts employed to give an apparently fresh voice to your tired old gripes.

You've got an obvious agenda, even if you weren't obviously Quickseller, and I don't blame him for not wanting to be a part of it.  Take a break from this for a minute and give us your opinion on Quickseller's escrow scamming.  Can you do that for me?

I asked yahoo62278 to respond to this thread, and below is his response:


I find it interesting that yahoo62278 thinks trying to eliminate conflicts of interest is a "witch hunt". This does not sound like someone who wants to be held accountable.

If anyone doubts the authenticity of this statement, it can be verified by an admin, the PMID is msg8205732


I also reached out to Blazed for a response, but he has not logged in since ~6 hours after I started this thread