Topic: Dooglus is supporting ponzis - page 8. (Read 9936 times)
I think that this is a little pretentious. Don't get me wrong, it's ok to discuss people's actions and question their reputation but why is this scam accusation submitted by someone that wasn't scammed? Dooglus was very clear about what he was developing. I'd say that by being in the crypto space for so long one should have grown some tolerance for the mere existence of financial schemes and activities that would have been unacceptable in most other occasions. There are just so many and in this case it seems to me as though Quickseller is trying to dig out old and now irrelevant information to damage dooglus. I don't know why that is though, maybe it boils down to a personal conflict without anything overly serious at stake.
There is obviously more to it, just quoting the most recent one:
I also don't think the forum is turning a blink eye towards Vod's abusive nature, nor his abusive trust ratings. Vod already has one exclusion and the only person on "level 1" in the DT network, dooglus is anticipated of being removed from DT -- I need to bother to gather the necessary evidence, and make the necessary arguments. BadBear has threatened to exclude Vod from his trust list on at least one occasion, and had (temporally) added one person to his trust list that really should not have been in his trust list who gave Vod a negative rating that was likely an effort to calm Vod down. Tomatocage was not happy with Vod's propensity to dox people that Vod does not like, and I have been told that BadBear does not like this either. I also believe that theymos used to have Vod in his trust list, which is not the case currently.
I think that this is a little pretentious. Don't get me wrong, it's ok to discuss people's actions and question their reputation but why is this scam accusation submitted by someone that wasn't scammed? Dooglus was very clear about what he was developing. I'd say that by being in the crypto space for so long one should have grown some tolerance for the mere existence of financial schemes and activities that would have been unacceptable in most other occasions. There are just so many and in this case it seems to me as though Quickseller is trying to dig out old and now irrelevant information to damage dooglus. I don't know why that is though, maybe it boils down to a personal conflict without anything overly serious at stake.
I guess if we are trying to get rid of the philosophy of ponzis, and get straight to the question, does Dooglus owe anyone money?
Nope, I believe that the operator of that ponzi actually paid everyone out that had remaining payouts before he closed it down.
Seller is just trying to be a shit disturber from what I can see. Just like any other day on the forums here really.
I think I'm missing something essential here. Where did dooglus support the ponzi? Got a link to that? The thread you linked to says quite the contrary:
https://archive.is/GJAt4#selection-5773.0-5773.105
You should do a Netflix and post it all at once for binge trolling.
Fix the url tag.
https://archive.is/GJAt4#selection-5773.0-5773.105
This completes the first part of my series of the transgressions of Dooglus
Part 1: Dooglus supporting ponzis [/url]
Part 1: Dooglus supporting ponzis [/url]
You should do a Netflix and post it all at once for binge trolling.
Fix the url tag.
Each person has their own philosophy on ponzis, but this is the scam accusation section. Unless you are claiming that Dooglus is directly involved in a ponzi that has already scammed people, this is the wrong section. I'd move the thread to reputation or something similar, but I'll leave it to you for a while to either make an accusation that would support this thread being in scam accusation, or move it.
I guess if we are trying to get rid of the philosophy of ponzis, and get straight to the question, does Dooglus owe anyone money?
I guess if we are trying to get rid of the philosophy of ponzis, and get straight to the question, does Dooglus owe anyone money?
What happened:: In October 2015 Dooglus edited code for a ponzi script in order to fix some bugs with said ponzi script.
OMG. Dooglus fixes bugs. Such a surprise. The script was already available to everyone, in use in the wild, and malfunctioning badly. I fixed a couple of bugs in it so it would malfunction less badly. It still sucks.
What do you do other than attempt to stir up trouble and lie to people?
What you are saying is that it is okay to support ponzies as long as you only fix their code as well as provide it for everyone to use and modify for their own intents?
People on DT constantly neg users here, especially new users, for even posting in a thread that has the word ponzi in it. They are, and have been, setting an example for folks that its not okay to even talk about them much less help them with their code. There are several threads here where every single poster in a ponzi thread has been negged by DT members.
Seems a bit two faced that this doesn't apply to everyone. As much as I think Quickseller is a shady shit I agree with him here.
By you fixing their code, and still providing it to this day, for others to use to scam people with is still you supporting ponzis regardless of your intent.
No ponzi or business online or offline contains 0 risk. I could easily download it from your github, gain a large amount of deposits, then fuck off with the funds just as easily as Billy Joe Bob Jackson down the street could without modifying a thing on it.
Additional Notes: Any amount of clam no matter how trivial has a chance to stake.. SO your point on your additional note isn't valid.
It has a chance to stake, however the chance is not very high with small amounts of CLAM in a wallet/address. P.S. Going after people on this forum that have been proven trustworthy with over 60M worth of bitcoin for giving a buddy a hand with some code is pure fucking faggotry,
Oh, so just because someone has been trusted with a lot of money in the past, they should be given a free pass in being able to do whatever they want in the future....you should vote for Hilary. Slandering others doesn't make you more credible, It just makes you look like an upset child.
Slander? What have I said here that is incorrect? Please point it out 
The answer to all of the above:
I don't have time to hold your hand and explain to you the finer points of logic and thinking at the moment, you obviously need a new hobby other than trying to cause a commotion on the internet, because if you think we'll forget how much of a turd in the punch bowl you are if you accuse everyone else of being shit you are sadly mistaken.
Get a life Quickseller.
Additional Notes: Any amount of clam no matter how trivial has a chance to stake.. SO your point on your additional note isn't valid.
It has a chance to stake, however the chance is not very high with small amounts of CLAM in a wallet/address. P.S. Going after people on this forum that have been proven trustworthy with over 60M worth of bitcoin for giving a buddy a hand with some code is pure fucking faggotry,
Oh, so just because someone has been trusted with a lot of money in the past, they should be given a free pass in being able to do whatever they want in the future....you should vote for Hilary. Slandering others doesn't make you more credible, It just makes you look like an upset child.
Slander? What have I said here that is incorrect? Please point it out
Wrong section, dooglus did not scam anyone.
What happened:: In October 2015 Dooglus edited code for a ponzi script in order to fix some bugs with said ponzi script.
OMG. Dooglus fixes bugs. Such a surprise. The script was already available to everyone, in use in the wild, and malfunctioning badly. I fixed a couple of bugs in it so it would malfunction less badly. It still sucks.
What do you do other than attempt to stir up trouble and lie to people?
What lie have I said in this thread? Please point it out to me. If you can successfully find a lie written by me in the OP of this thread then I might even payout a
Well, First off that clam ponzi was run by a member other than dooglus. You're sort of grasping at straws..
That's because there's nothing other than "straws" for him to grasp at.
He's trying to make it look like I support Ponzis because I saw a bug and fixed it. That's what I do - I see stuff that's wrong (like idiots telling lies on the forum) and try to put it right (by correcting them). Sometimes they get butthurt and "grasp at straws" for years afterwards. But nobody pays them any attention.
There's no evidence of me "supporting" your Ponzi, because I never did. It was always a bad idea.
As I told you at the time, that script is crap, and the concept of attempting to pay the required exponentially increasing returns from staking rewards is fundamentally broken. But you figured that out for yourself eventually.
I heard he's great at escrow services doog. 
I heard he has a history of pretending to be multiple different people so he can escrow his own deals.
And we're meant to take him seriously?
What do you do other than attempt to stir up trouble and lie to people?
I heard he's great at escrow services doog.
What happened:: In October 2015 Dooglus edited code for a ponzi script in order to fix some bugs with said ponzi script.
OMG. Dooglus fixes bugs. Such a surprise. The script was already available to everyone, in use in the wild, and malfunctioning badly. I fixed a couple of bugs in it so it would malfunction less badly. It still sucks.
What do you do other than attempt to stir up trouble and lie to people?
Well, First off that clam ponzi was run by a member other than dooglus. You're sort of grasping at straws..
If memory serves me correctly dooglus had helped the operator of that site with a security hole in his script.
dooglus never profited nor endorsed the ponzi from my knowledge, nor did anyone lose any money on the game.
Also looking back on that ponzi and it's design their was no way for anyone to lose money due to CLAM's high rate of POS.
And, If I recall correctly, Before the ponzi was shut down everyone got paid out what they were due out of the owners pocket.
Additional Notes: Any amount of clam no matter how trivial has a chance to stake.. SO your point on your additional note isn't valid.
P.S. Going after people on this forum that have been proven trustworthy with over 60M worth of bitcoin for giving a buddy a hand with some code is pure fucking faggotry, and you need to spend your time working on your own obvious personality flaws before witch hunting others seller.
Slandering others doesn't make you more credible, It just makes you look like an upset child.
If memory serves me correctly dooglus had helped the operator of that site with a security hole in his script.
dooglus never profited nor endorsed the ponzi from my knowledge, nor did anyone lose any money on the game.
Also looking back on that ponzi and it's design their was no way for anyone to lose money due to CLAM's high rate of POS.
And, If I recall correctly, Before the ponzi was shut down everyone got paid out what they were due out of the owners pocket.
Additional Notes: Any amount of clam no matter how trivial has a chance to stake.. SO your point on your additional note isn't valid.
P.S. Going after people on this forum that have been proven trustworthy with over 60M worth of bitcoin for giving a buddy a hand with some code is pure fucking faggotry, and you need to spend your time working on your own obvious personality flaws before witch hunting others seller.
Slandering others doesn't make you more credible, It just makes you look like an upset child.
Well...people have gotten Negative Feedback's for writing scripts for Ponzi's (example BSM) which is considered equally punishable under the DT's laws.CryotoDevil who's a DT under Dooglus takes the initiative of negging ponzi users which is a good thing.Not sure how to reach to the above situation .
If you agree that negative feedback is appropriate for those that write scripts for ponzis then I would suggest that you leave dooglus a negative trust rating. Since you generally need to trust those who are in your trust network (to a certain extent), I would also suggest that you exclude dooglus from your trust network by adding the following to your trust list:
Code:
~dooglus
Well...people have gotten Negative Feedback's for writing scripts for Ponzi's (example BSM) which is considered equally punishable under the DT's laws.CryotoDevil who's a DT under Dooglus takes the initiative of negging ponzi users which is a good thing.Not sure how to reach to the above situation .
Jump to: