I don't have the time right now to read everything you've written but I do have the time to answer your thread question.
"Did Quickseller & marcotheminer frame ndnhc?" No, I did not frame ndnhc. This sound like one heck of a conspiracy theory.
I'm fairly sure I know your main account, doesn't matter though.
Topic: Did Quickseller or marcotheminer frame ndnhc? If not, who did? - page 4. (Read 3558 times)
This is a throwaway account created specifically to raise these points, I do not want to start a possible trust war. Even my writing style has been changed for the purposes of this thread to try and make me unidentifiable. I am an experienced Bitcointalk member, and I'll give you the following details about my account: 2+ years registered, Legendary, decently high trust (dark green before it became easy as fuck to get). On DefaultTrust, depth 2. If a staff member (preferably global mod/admin) wants to verify this that is fine, I can get my more experienced account to PM them but that information is confidential, must not be disclosed and I will not verify to non-staff. This is on the condition that they MUST keep it 100% confidential and not disclose it EVEN to other staff.
In light of the recent possible framing of ndnhc I have decided to put the following information out here for now for you guys to think on. I will not put an overall opinion in yet but this is the information I've gathered. Do with it as you will. This thread is not per se an accusation thread but a gathering of a mixture of info and my personal opinions on what may have happened (this may be all false - I am not guaranteeing it's true at this time).
The main points of this list start at #7.
1. Quickseller was recently removed from the DefaultTrust list, perceivably for being unethical with his ratings. He has now been re-added, however.
2. marcotheminer is a signature campaign manager. ndnhc is also a signature campaign manager.
3. I have reason to believe marcotheminer wanted to take over ndnhc's campaign with DaDice, but that this failed. I will not verify this with ndnhc in PM by asking for proof, if he wants to publicly do that on this thread if he is allowed to then that'd be nice.
4. It is perceivable that Quickseller is somewhat friendly with marcotheminer, even using neutral DefaultTrust feedbacks to communicate with him. This is speculation but either way it doesn't really need to be said, I just decided to. It doesn't particularly matter if QS is friends with marcotheminer but it's worth noting.
5. Point #3 resulted in a fail as ndnhc remained the manager of the campaign. However, what better way would there be to take control of the signature campaign than to get ndnhc kicked...for extortion?
6. ndnhc did not visit Bitcointalk on the 28th, 29th or 30th of May.
7. On May 26th, the DaDice Bounty Prediction contest closed. It is understood that all guesses after that date would have been rendered invalid.
8. On the same thread page, only 4 posts after the announcement of the contest closing, question2 posted an entry using the address 12Ey8KPWPcv22VVUdZWCTQFZH97Yy1XAuE. Timestamp: May 27, 2015, 09:44:49 PM. This timestamp is important. Why would someone be entering when it's clear the contest is over?
9. On May 28, 2015, at 02:18:36 PM forum time, question2 edited the post changing a "1" in the address to an "I". ndnhc was away at this time and unable to access bitcointalk. There is also no sane reason ndnhc would decide to change it if he was honestly guilty, as this increased suspicions.
10. Timestamp: May 27, 2015, 10:30:41 PM. Quickseller opens the "ndnhc is an extortionist" thread with only 45 minutes, 46 seconds having passed since question2 posted the address. That is an extremely fast response time for a read in a section that is not even popular for most users (Games and Rounds? You trying to tell me that's a main section?).
11. Quickseller must have done all of the following in 45 minutes and 46 seconds:
- Looked through an obsolete section
- Looked through a sea of threads
- Happened to find that post
- Looked up the address
- Looked at transaction logs and actually (assuming he uses blockchain.info as that is what he linked to) happened to have just clicked on the first transaction id on the address page to find the second address used to sign - the transactions on the address page do not show other input addresses
- Looked up this second address
- Found it matched to ndnhc with thread proof
- Typed up the entire accusation with archive links, quotes, "proof", etc.
12. Quickseller is either a heavy user of steroids and in training with Usain Bolt, or something is wrong here.
13. Quickseller has been reported to have a history of unethical ratings.
14. Even if he managed to *somehow* do that in 45 minutes, 46 seconds (which let's be honest, could you do all that from scratch with no idea of what was going to happen, just randomly browsing bitcointalk?), he didn't even give time to consider the report.
15. Let's go back to point #9. Why did this happen? Did someone want to strengthen the case?
16. Wait, strengthen the case? Who in their right mind would do something to make themselves look more suspicious...? Unless...it was a framing?
That's all for me. If you want to donate in some hope you'll be able to track the transaction later on to find that I signed it with another address so that you can find out (No, that isn't happening, I'll use a mixer) then my (fresh) address is 18zoAoKTgTv5NJqEvLSwFWoxGWf5MQZVGv.
Also, I may if this boils over well, decide to reveal my identity. Maybe.
Some extra butter: Anything that may lead to who framed ndnhc, if you think it wasn't QS, is appreciated. I want to find out who this bugger is.
In light of the recent possible framing of ndnhc I have decided to put the following information out here for now for you guys to think on. I will not put an overall opinion in yet but this is the information I've gathered. Do with it as you will. This thread is not per se an accusation thread but a gathering of a mixture of info and my personal opinions on what may have happened (this may be all false - I am not guaranteeing it's true at this time).
The main points of this list start at #7.
1. Quickseller was recently removed from the DefaultTrust list, perceivably for being unethical with his ratings. He has now been re-added, however.
2. marcotheminer is a signature campaign manager. ndnhc is also a signature campaign manager.
3. I have reason to believe marcotheminer wanted to take over ndnhc's campaign with DaDice, but that this failed. I will not verify this with ndnhc in PM by asking for proof, if he wants to publicly do that on this thread if he is allowed to then that'd be nice.
4. It is perceivable that Quickseller is somewhat friendly with marcotheminer, even using neutral DefaultTrust feedbacks to communicate with him. This is speculation but either way it doesn't really need to be said, I just decided to. It doesn't particularly matter if QS is friends with marcotheminer but it's worth noting.
5. Point #3 resulted in a fail as ndnhc remained the manager of the campaign. However, what better way would there be to take control of the signature campaign than to get ndnhc kicked...for extortion?
6. ndnhc did not visit Bitcointalk on the 28th, 29th or 30th of May.
7. On May 26th, the DaDice Bounty Prediction contest closed. It is understood that all guesses after that date would have been rendered invalid.
8. On the same thread page, only 4 posts after the announcement of the contest closing, question2 posted an entry using the address 12Ey8KPWPcv22VVUdZWCTQFZH97Yy1XAuE. Timestamp: May 27, 2015, 09:44:49 PM. This timestamp is important. Why would someone be entering when it's clear the contest is over?
9. On May 28, 2015, at 02:18:36 PM forum time, question2 edited the post changing a "1" in the address to an "I". ndnhc was away at this time and unable to access bitcointalk. There is also no sane reason ndnhc would decide to change it if he was honestly guilty, as this increased suspicions.
10. Timestamp: May 27, 2015, 10:30:41 PM. Quickseller opens the "ndnhc is an extortionist" thread with only 45 minutes, 46 seconds having passed since question2 posted the address. That is an extremely fast response time for a read in a section that is not even popular for most users (Games and Rounds? You trying to tell me that's a main section?).
11. Quickseller must have done all of the following in 45 minutes and 46 seconds:
- Looked through an obsolete section
- Looked through a sea of threads
- Happened to find that post
- Looked up the address
- Looked at transaction logs and actually (assuming he uses blockchain.info as that is what he linked to) happened to have just clicked on the first transaction id on the address page to find the second address used to sign - the transactions on the address page do not show other input addresses
- Looked up this second address
- Found it matched to ndnhc with thread proof
- Typed up the entire accusation with archive links, quotes, "proof", etc.
12. Quickseller is either a heavy user of steroids and in training with Usain Bolt, or something is wrong here.
13. Quickseller has been reported to have a history of unethical ratings.
14. Even if he managed to *somehow* do that in 45 minutes, 46 seconds (which let's be honest, could you do all that from scratch with no idea of what was going to happen, just randomly browsing bitcointalk?), he didn't even give time to consider the report.
15. Let's go back to point #9. Why did this happen? Did someone want to strengthen the case?
16. Wait, strengthen the case? Who in their right mind would do something to make themselves look more suspicious...? Unless...it was a framing?
That's all for me. If you want to donate in some hope you'll be able to track the transaction later on to find that I signed it with another address so that you can find out (No, that isn't happening, I'll use a mixer) then my (fresh) address is 18zoAoKTgTv5NJqEvLSwFWoxGWf5MQZVGv.
Also, I may if this boils over well, decide to reveal my identity. Maybe.
Some extra butter: Anything that may lead to who framed ndnhc, if you think it wasn't QS, is appreciated. I want to find out who this bugger is.
Jump to: