Pages:
Author

Topic: "Last of the V8s" is filing fake scam reports - page 2. (Read 1058 times)

legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828

Well, it all depends on what "principals" you think are more important. I can't believe the party of Lincoln has accommodated those with similar points of view to R0ach. That's what the Democratic party was supposed to be about...

I explained in detail what I meant by principles. I really don't see how political parties play into his discussion.

That was probably the wrong tangent. I guess the main point is there is a quandary in my mind between the principles of free speech and the repugnant nature of what r0ach's fingertips unleash on the WO board. The members who regularly post on the WO board have been more than longsuffering with r0ach. He's lucky that this current account of his has only accumulated 2 red tags. I think anyone who would initiate a trade with him on this forum should take a glance at his post history, first. And Lauda has used his post history as the evidence link. It's probably all moot anyway, since I doubt r0ach will be doing any trades on this board considering that he thinks all cryptocurrencies are shit coins. Also, the WO board, where he posts almost exclusively, doesn't display trust ratings.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 4606
diamond-handed zealot
Bitten off more than you can chew r0ach.
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
No, Lauda has not given CryptopreneurBrainboss a negative rating. She has given R0ach a negative rating. However, if you want to become a white knight for realr0ach, please go ahead. I'm popping the popcorn, now.The stuff he posts on this forum would have gotten him banned on the vast majority of social media platforms. Him being allowed to continue to post here is a testament to how liberal bitcointalk is when it comes to letting people express their views.

Did I say Lauda negative rated CryptopreneurBrainboss? I don't know R0ach from a hole in the ground, and I am not white knighting for anything other than principles. This is not a question about how liberal this forum is, it is a question of this negative rating being abusive. I don't think people should be able to negative rate people just because they don't like something that they said, as I have explained before I advocate for a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws to be the standard for negative rating. He may be a racist asshole, but that doesn't make it open season on him for trust system abuse.

Well, it all depends on what "principals" you think are more important. I can't believe the party of Lincoln has accommodated those with similar points of view to R0ach. That's what the Democratic party was supposed to be about...

I explained in detail what I meant by principles. I really don't see how political parties play into his discussion.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828
No, Lauda has not given CryptopreneurBrainboss a negative rating. She has given R0ach a negative rating. However, if you want to become a white knight for realr0ach, please go ahead. I'm popping the popcorn, now.The stuff he posts on this forum would have gotten him banned on the vast majority of social media platforms. Him being allowed to continue to post here is a testament to how liberal bitcointalk is when it comes to letting people express their views.

Did I say Lauda negative rated CryptopreneurBrainboss? I don't know R0ach from a hole in the ground, and I am not white knighting for anything other than principles. This is not a question about how liberal this forum is, it is a question of this negative rating being abusive. I don't think people should be able to negative rate people just because they don't like something that they said, as I have explained before I advocate for a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws to be the standard for negative rating. He may be a racist asshole, but that doesn't make it open season on him for trust system abuse.

Well, it all depends on what "principals" you think are more important. I can't believe the party of Lincoln has accommodated those with similar points of view to R0ach. That's what the Democratic party was supposed to be about...
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
No, Lauda has not given CryptopreneurBrainboss a negative rating. She has given R0ach a negative rating. However, if you want to become a white knight for realr0ach, please go ahead. I'm popping the popcorn, now.The stuff he posts on this forum would have gotten him banned on the vast majority of social media platforms. Him being allowed to continue to post here is a testament to how liberal bitcointalk is when it comes to letting people express their views.

Did I say Lauda negative rated CryptopreneurBrainboss? I don't know R0ach from a hole in the ground, and I am not white knighting for anything other than principles. This is not a question about how liberal this forum is, it is a question of this negative rating being abusive. I don't think people should be able to negative rate people just because they don't like something that they said, as I have explained before I advocate for a standard of evidence of theft, violation of contractual agreement, or violation of applicable laws to be the standard for negative rating. He may be a racist asshole, but that doesn't make it open season on him for trust system abuse.
copper member
Activity: 2338
Merit: 4543
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I was contemplating whether to act on this or not for a long time just like I did with bcash scammers. There you go.

As despicable as I find r0ach's comments and blatant bigotry, I am torn about the use of the trust system in this way.  However, bones261 makes a really good point.  I'm a fairly trusting person, but I would have a hard time trusting people who spew hate such as r0ach does.

But that's not the whole deal, is it?  r0ach is accusing another member of attempting to scam the whole community, which is an allegation for which he can only provide circumstantial evidence.  That makes this a different type of situation.  Spreading misinformation about another member should never be tolerated.

@r0ach, if you have a suspicion about another member, feel free to share it, but don't make it sound like it's a proven fact when the only "evidence" that exists is "he said/she said."

 
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828
@bones

I see nothing to say that he would be any more of a scammer than those that sound calm and reasonable. Scammers tend to be slick not be putting peoples backs up before they strike.

     Given V8's response, I think it is best to let the WO regulars handle this in their own way. If Lauda wants to back it up, more power to her.
legendary
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167
MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG
V8 is now DT2, so it does effect his score....However, given r0ach's current stance on crytocurrency, I don't see exactly how this would impede him at all. Unless he is hoping to use bitcointalk to construct a network of people white men willing to do face to face commerce involving silver and gold bullion.

Exactly, r0ach is just a troll. I have no idea why he posts here. He enjoys ridiculing bitcoin too, his presence here is a total waste of his time. Life is too short!

We need to be very careful defining a troll. If a person presents an argument that you do not agree with then unless you can debunk it then it is not trolling.

Trolling is not so much of a worry as persons proliferating incorrect and misleading information that is observably proven incorrect or supporting those that do. Those are just slightly less damaging than scammers and way less detrimental to crypto than real trolls who are basically just piss takers.

@bones

I see nothing to say that he would be any more of a scammer than those that sound calm and reasonable. Scammers tend to be slick not be putting peoples backs up before they strike.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 4392
Be a bank
This was all hashed out in our thread very eloquently:

Patently false. I sold no-where near ~$5,000 USD of the top. Sold as it was crashing down from the top, and I started panicking.
Nowhere near $5000 off the top you say?  There's a quote below of you selling $1 million worth at $14.5k.  You sold around $5 million worth from what I can tell altogther while posting bull spam the entire time telling everyone else to buy or "hodl".  By your own admission in the quotes below, you were telling everyone else to buy or "hodl" after you had already extracted "an obsecene amount of fiat".  If you actually believed the price was going higher or even believed bitcoin was a store of value at all, you would be buying instead of selling.  Instead, you were dumping like mad and then posting bull spam while doing it and afterwards.  

 Ok. So it was "near $5,000" off the ATH then. Oops. Oh well  Roll Eyes

 Not sure what your deal is with me. Or with yourself, for that matter.

 You make it sound like I was intentionally trying to fuck over this entire thread, or something, when I was genuinely caught up in the enthusiasm of the rally - Like most of the rest of the normal people in the thread.

 I appreciate you going through and digging through my history. That was a nice trip down memory line.

 Still failed to make whatever point you were trying to make, tho.

  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 I mean, do you have any fucking concept of meta at all ?

 Here you are, quite possibly one of the most un-hinged people on these entire forums, not to mention an utter failure of a human being, and you're chastising me for my exuberance during the rally, and making some bad calls mis-judging the momentum, and poorly-worded, boastful hubristic posts, while chatting with this community ?

 Yeah, I can admit to all that.

 On the other hand, we have you.

 Whose shit does not stink.

 At all.

 ok.gif

Jesus Bob.  YES.  He want's the whole thread to hate you and mistrust you.  To cause division.  Plus I imagine he is not fond of black folks.

Fuck him.  He is a liar and a troll.  He is either a myopic piece of shit who hates he sold his corn for silver, or a fucking psyop from somewhere.  I think the second is more likely than I would want it to be.

This is not about his hate agenda or his anti-bitcoin trolling, it's about him lying to pursue those agendas.
This is not his only lie by any means. There's more, even in this thread. You can't trust him, hence the red mark.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828
@bones

This could or could not be true (i have not read his recent posts but he is a famous poster from the old days on the alt boards and I never saw anything very offensive there - this is the original roach or not??) but again this is a matter for ADMIN not a bunch of self serving goons to take care of. Unless it is scam related this is not a scam tag issue.

Yes this is the original R0ach. His points are exactly the same from when his account got hacked in 2017. He didn't miss a beat. Also, if you happen to be a women, a jew, or have any skin color other than white, you probably are not going to enjoy a great deal of his material... Cheesy Also, r0ach has "evolved" quite a bit from the old days. Basically, he thinks cryptocurrency as a whole is a load of BS. I think the turn around was complete just prior to bitfinex getting hacked.

Well, I can not say that I ascribe to these views. However I hold to the view that these are admin related concerns and not for DT red trust nazi's to take into their own hands when clearly their mandate is for scammers and scam related matters. When you start allowing red trust for any other reason it leads to abuse and the crushing of free speech.



If you were a women, a Jew, or a non-white person, would you want to engage in trade with this guy? (Especially divulging shipping details.)
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 9709
#1 VIP Crypto Casino
V8 is now DT2, so it does effect his score....However, given r0ach's current stance on crytocurrency, I don't see exactly how this would impede him at all. Unless he is hoping to use bitcointalk to construct a network of people white men willing to do face to face commerce involving silver and gold bullion.

Exactly, r0ach is just a troll. I have no idea why he posts here. He enjoys ridiculing bitcoin too, his presence here is a total waste of his time. Life is too short!
legendary
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167
MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG
@bones

This could or could not be true (i have not read his recent posts but he is a famous poster from the old days on the alt boards and I never saw anything very offensive there - this is the original roach or not??) but again this is a matter for ADMIN not a bunch of self serving goons to take care of. Unless it is scam related this is not a scam tag issue.

Yes this is the original R0ach. His points are exactly the same from when his account got hacked in 2017. He didn't miss a beat. Also, if you happen to be a women, a jew, or have any skin color other than white, you probably are not going to enjoy a great deal of his material... Cheesy Also, r0ach has "evolved" quite a bit from the old days. Basically, he thinks cryptocurrency as a whole is a load of BS. I think the turn around was complete just prior to bitfinex getting hacked.

Well, I can not say that I ascribe to these views. However I hold to the view that these are admin related concerns and not for DT red trust nazi's to take into their own hands when clearly their mandate is for scammers and scam related matters. When you start allowing red trust for any other reason it leads to abuse and the crushing of free speech.

legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828
@bones

This could or could not be true (i have not read his recent posts but he is a famous poster from the old days on the alt boards and I never saw anything very offensive there - this is the original roach or not??) but again this is a matter for ADMIN not a bunch of self serving goons to take care of. Unless it is scam related this is not a scam tag issue.

Yes this is the original R0ach. His points are exactly the same from when his account got hacked in 2017. He didn't miss a beat. Also, if you happen to be a women, a jew, or have any skin color other than white, you probably are not going to enjoy a great deal of his material... Cheesy Also, r0ach has "evolved" quite a bit from the old days. Basically, he thinks cryptocurrency as a whole is a load of BS. I think the turn around was complete just prior to bitfinex getting hacked.
legendary
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1167
MY RED TRUST LEFT BY SCUMBAGS - READ MY SIG
I came to understand, feedbacks which aren't related to trade or scam like activities shouldn't be left with a positive or negative tag. The third option which is the neutral feedback should be used in a case if you feel the need lo leave a feedback.
Which is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

I was contemplating whether to act on this or not for a long time just like I did with bcash scammers. There you go.

REALLY?? so you are saying you will do what you like then? Because I just saw Theymos say red trust will be for scammers or those strongly likely to scam.

Of course you will continue to abuse the trust system as suits you and the goons. Right up until the tide builds against you. Then you and the rest of the turds are going to be flushed down and away from the systems of control you abuse.

@bones

This could or could not be true (i have not read his recent posts but he is a famous poster from the old days on the alt boards and I never saw anything very offensive there - this is the original roach or not??) but again this is a matter for ADMIN not a bunch of self serving goons to take care of. Unless it is scam related this is not a scam tag issue.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1828
I came to understand, feedbacks which aren't related to trade or scam like activities shouldn't be left with a positive or negative tag. The third option which is the neutral feedback should be used in a case if you feel the need lo leave a feedback.
Which is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

I was contemplating whether to act on this or not for a long time just like I did with bcash scammers. There you go.

I see, so some one disagrees with your burn them all attitude and they are automatically spreading misinformation and get a negative rating. You believe whatever serves you at any given moment. The tide is changing around here, and you aren't going to like the way you look, I guarantee it.


No, Lauda has not given CryptopreneurBrainboss a negative rating. She has given R0ach a negative rating. However, if you want to become a white knight for realr0ach, please go ahead. I'm popping the popcorn, now.The stuff he posts on this forum would have gotten him banned on the vast majority of social media platforms. Him being allowed to continue to post here is a testament to how liberal bitcointalk is when it comes to letting people express their views.

@R0ach. Have you attempted to get your original account back recently? If you still have the original e-mail that you created that account with, the chances are fair you can have it back in about a week.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/recovering-hackedlost-accounts-5089777
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
I came to understand, feedbacks which aren't related to trade or scam like activities shouldn't be left with a positive or negative tag. The third option which is the neutral feedback should be used in a case if you feel the need lo leave a feedback.
Which is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

I was contemplating whether to act on this or not for a long time just like I did with bcash scammers. There you go.

I see, so some one disagrees with your burn them all attitude and they are automatically spreading misinformation and get a negative rating. You believe whatever serves you at any given moment. The tide is changing around here, and you aren't going to like the way you look, I guarantee it.

legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
You're literally an ANTIFA member.
This is good to know. Keep trying.
sr. member
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
Then we have:

On feedback pages, you can leave trade feedback. There are no rules for this, but here are some guidelines:
- Do not rate people based on the quality of their posts.

Which is what Lauda and Last of the V8s are arbitrarly doing to random people they disagree with or can't beat in debate.  Did I also mention women perjure themselves in court at a rate far higher than men which is why no civilized nation in the past ever allowed women to be stand as witnesses in the first place?  They have no form of honor whatsoever, no integrity, do not respect any type of logic or reason, and just lie to try and distort things in their favor. Your (Lauda) cognitive dissonance level is so high that you don't even understand I'm the only person on the forum NOT lying and that you are the one attempting to lie about "decentralization" for personal gain.
sr. member
Activity: 924
Merit: 311
#TheGoyimKnow
I came to understand, feedbacks which aren't related to trade or scam like activities shouldn't be left with a positive or negative tag. The third option which is the neutral feedback should be used in a case if you feel the need lo leave a feedback.
Which is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

I was contemplating whether to act on this or not for a long time just like I did with bcash scammers. There you go.

Of course the scammer feedback system is not for completely arbitrary opinion bullshit like you don't like their taste in music or fashion so you give them a negative score.  It's pretty obvious Last of the V8s is abusing the system when he filed a scam report against Jbreher for simply owning Bcash (lol).  I could give two shits about Bcash, and Jbreher and I are not friends, but if you can file a scam report against someone for owning Bcash, then filing a scam report on people for owning Dogecoin or Monero would be valid too.  

Hell, it would also be completely viable for me to file a scam report against EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the ENTIRE FORUM supporting bitcoin for being scammers because transaction validators are designed to centralize in every cryptocurrency and decentralization is a 100% completely unsolvable problem.  So do you really want to play by the rules you and Last of the V8s advocate now, Lauda?  I just noticed you left a fake scam report on my page too.  

You're literally an ANTIFA member.  They're unable to win in any legit debate so their only valid tactic is to try and censor or practice defamation.  Just like you, Last of the V8s is also incapable of beating me in debate which is why he did this.  Nothing I've said is even false.  It's YOU that's spreading disinformation.  Creating a decentralized digital currency is 100% impossible, and any non-fungible currency is also a permissioned ledger by default, which is why I advocate physical metals.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
I came to understand, feedbacks which aren't related to trade or scam like activities shouldn't be left with a positive or negative tag. The third option which is the neutral feedback should be used in a case if you feel the need lo leave a feedback.
Which is false. Stop spreading misinformation.

I don't know why you think it is a misinformation, but thats exactly what's stated by theymos, about the usage of trust.

In particular, in my view:
 - Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
Annoying =/= consistently posting misinformation (there is no doubt about OP when it comes to this clearly). This is elementary school knowledge, don't waste our time.

I am also really annoyed by his topic with basically wrong guidelines regarding tags, which he keeps bumping as if it was THE TRUTH.

Link: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/infographic-guide-on-possible-reasons-to-leave-a-veve-trust-feedbacks-5100675
Sadly there is little that can be done (based on current forum policies) to prevent the spread of such or any other misinformation.
Pages:
Jump to: