Topic: Lauda creating flags against random people linked to threads not related. (Read 1641 times)

There is literaly no proof on that flag, she done https://imgur.com/a/D1dMYi4 and just waits for her puppies to follow and rate without any actual proof as done in other posts in that thread.
It clearly states on any of the flags a user should atleast be suspected as scammer thing I bet you can't find even if you look at my account with a magnifying glass.

And ofcourse the user I got rated for was manager of bitcoinair you can google and see how it went. Never seemed a coincidence to me they jumped like hungry hyenas after me.
It was the perfect excuse to kick me out of DT2 exactly after I entered, couldn't care less about DT I do care of having restrictions because of a illogical rating.

I say all of you bitching over a death threat ON THE INTERNET are just pussies, its like in two years bitcointalk became a paradise for offended whores and scammers can just go along creating and managing projects that become proven scams then just have green rating.
Getting sick of knowing you can count trustworthy projects with your hand fingers but everyone ignoring that for a reason or another.
Of 20 shitcoin OPs i tagged the only one that answered back trying to "defend" himself was parodium with his BitcoinAir scam.

While i appreciate lauda account having tagged so many scammers over the past years I'd say almost certainly it's a shared account and she haven't done it alone.
And while they keep bitching about alt accounts they know most users here do have alts and use them but keep their mouth shut because they know eachother.

It's funny to see how most crypto people I know either stay away from this forum either quit using it. I can say not even 10% are on this forum.

Update on one of the flags created by Lauda:

[quote author=Timelord2067 link=topic=5193695.msg53406661#msg53406661 date=1576971088]Flag 712: whoeier starts a scam accusation against four users in 2018.  Much later, Lauda creates just one flag against jamalaezaz, but not against other three. Five days after thread started (8th January 2018) whoeier updates the OP and writes that "Iam2Good( also represented Visale ) and myself have found an solution to this. In my opinion this is resolved." so Flag should be withdrawn by Lauda as the issue was resolved a year before flags were created.  Lauda was a part of thread and therefore aware of this in 2018.[/quote]

Lauda is even aware (back in 2018) that there was no scam being undertaken by jamalaezaz:

Archive [1a], [1b]

[quote author=iam2good link=topic=2681942.msg27643377#msg27643377 date=1515325653]
[quote author=Lauda link=topic=2681942.msg27641333#msg27641333 date=1515323303]
[quote author=iam2good link=topic=2681942.msg27640672#msg27640672 date=1515322506]
Jamal and Avirunes did not scam me, they simply did not do the work i asked them to do and when i pointed out the proof that they do not do their work and i will not pay them they never  argue with me because i am right and until today none of them receive a penny from me.
[/quote]
Could you provide proof of this? Jamal has been ripe for a negative rating for a very long time.
[/quote]
When i want to start the bounty i contacted Avirunes and Avirunes told me he cannot handle the bounty alone but willl contact Jamal so they can do it together and when i make the payment then they will split it together. For this reason, i never communicated with Jamal but with Avirunes. See the QUOTES from our communication below:
[/quote]

As you can see Lauda has a vendetta against jamalaezaz by focusing on him and not avirunes.  jamalaezaz was in effect a sub-contractor to avirunes, yet there is no flag that has ever been created against avirunes or the others named.  When will theymos take action?

---

---

Although jamalaezaz slid down a very slippery slope back in circa late 2017/early 2018 creating a fake flag against jamalaezaz is not the way to move forward.

jamalaezaz appears to be trying to make himself a productive member of the community once more and the guy who created this fake flag (Lauda) is simply passing jamalaezaz the other way on the murky slippery slope.

---

---

https://bpip.org/flag.aspx?id=712

---

---

Comment:

@sabotag3x , @JollyGood , @robelneo , @ChuckBuck , @Enre , @rhomelmabini , @RBF , @bobitza , @ScamViruS are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda

---

IN flag 1260 https://bpip.org/flag.aspx?id=1260 Lauda has created a fake flag against user andulolika who started a thread called:

Using trust rating for a death threat TMAN, foxpup and lauda.

Lauda's falg cites the thread as "evidence" of their flags proof, yet andulolika started the thread to talk about TMAN, foxpup and Lauda.

The flag is therefore invalid.


Comment:

@TMAN , @TheUltraElite , @joksim299 , @AlexSimion , @nullius are supporting a fake flag created by Lauda

Both of Lauda's negative feedbacks against my main user profile are retaliatory which @theymos wants a stop put to.

I will not be doing so. The requirements for a flag are a subset of the requirements for a negative rating, i.e. are much stricter. That was the whole intent behind the introduction of the flag-system. Therefore, no contradiction. If you want to argue your case individually, then this thread is not where I would be willing to do so. If each person tried this, then this thread will turn into rubbish which I don't want. You can pick PM, your own thread, or something else.

---

Please keep in mind that I'm evidently overloaded with the grave injustice being done on the forum in 2020 and your position in the queue would be between 5 - 10 (estimate based on unanswered posts, threads, and PMs, but primarily PMs). Certain individuals, who I have repeatedly asked to wait, are also impatiently PM-ing me in very short time periods (anything under 1 month when I ask for time which I only do when I really need to, is very short). They are making this much worse.
I'm sorry for this, but there's nothing I can do about it..

I notice you've removed your flag against me claiming that I'm high-risk to trade with;


However you've left the negative feedback with the same reference, specifically claiming;


I therefore recommend you return the flag (if this is what you still believe) to avoid inconsistencies with your claims. Unless you are claiming that trading with me is high-risk, but users are not at risk of losing their money? This doesn't make much sense in opinion, it seems more likely you removed it due to lack of support, which isn't a good reason to be honest.

Thanks, withdrew a couple more and some which I really disagree with e.g. Bitcoin SV type-3.

I just did Unfortunately, in BBCode the comments are on a new line, so I can't easily grep them all.. That works in HTML, but I can't post it.
I did it manual, so please let me know if you find a mistake.

Are you able to include the flag comments? This would help Lauda further identify flags with improper references, to save having to regurgitate what has already been referenced.

Here's an overview of all Flags you've created, 4 of those have been withdrawn:
Update: I've manually added the comments to the BBCode.

You need to update your data and the claim. Many of the flags are withdrawn, and the flag on xolxol is appropriate. Thanks for helping me find inaccurate flags. Let me know if there are more.

Bump

What's an offtoper? Do you mean a bottle cap?


You too 

Oh my god, Greatest offtopers detected: timelord2067 and dragonvslinux

Lauda is a troll. Thats why this topic is created. Topic about Lauda

Agreed - The Flag doesn't reference a valid thread with evidence.

Please don't thank me. I'm not suggesting people oppose this for your benefit, but for the integrity of the flag system in place. A system that you regularly abuse.

Thanks. He could have at least not used this one:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1086;oppose

Please, support this flag against Lauda:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=1086;support

Thanks for all supporters

Since your keeping count of these things,  a few new flags I've noticed with a lack of proper referencing.
I even tried to correct the reference for Example 1 flag but was effectively over ruled by a DT member (as linked above).

1. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=884
Note: Supported by Lauda and another DT2 member, opposed by two DT1 members and two DT2 members (withdrawn)

2. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=886
Note: Same reference problem as Example 1 and supported by Lauda (withdrawn)

3. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=709
Note: Same refrence problem as Example 1 and supported by Lauda (inactive/active*)

This is also the same referencing problem as previously mentioned:


Probably just due to the following though:


*credit

I wouldn't exactly go poking Lauda's carcase just yet; he's only been offline barely 72 hours so I wouldn't read too much into it.  If it were three weeks, or even three months then it might be a different matter.

Now that you've had your laugh, please be respectful that this thread is intended to track Lauda's ~85% false flags, it's not intended as an open forum to discuss him.

But thank you for your words of encouragement.

i agreed,this mafia leader seems to be out of town or maybe hes dead for good or just hiding until his position come back,lets hope that the other mafia members will be outcasted from their positions so this forum would be back to normal like the old days which these abusive people doesnt exist..

Hey Timelord2067, finally you are doing some good job for the forum. The DT is being reigned by assholes and if you remove all of them, you deserve the title which your name has, The lord of Time 

his head is morelikely on the darkside right now,thats why hes just doing whatis right even the whole forum disagree! theymos is done with this pussy blinded by his own stupidity.

Moving right along...

http://loyce.club/trust/flags/39.html

40 Insufficient support. Lauda flagged Bitcoin SV (type 3, see why). Supported by Foxpup, Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, mosprognoz, Iamtutut, GeoRW, korner. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, chimk, jbreher, Quickseller, peloso, MirkoIta, hv_, HardFireMiner, sirsplashalot, williamuk, actisstupidname, Bitcoin SV, breign. - In a thread started by nutildah although the it's obvious that the thread concerns the coin called Bitcoin SV, the actual user Bitcoin SV isn't mentioned. (might be splitting hairs I know, but the thread can be locked at any time thus null and voiding the Flag).  The majority oppose the Flag including theymos.

47 Insufficient support. Lauda flagged bill gator (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, TheUltraElite, Timelord2067. Opposed by OgNasty, malevolent, redsn0w, The Pharmacist, eddie13, Steamtyme, TECSHARE, Quickseller, Rmcdermott927, bill gator, teeGUMES, Thule, otrkid1970, actisstupidname, BharatDEX.  - Lauda has voided his own flag by locking the thread but not withdrawing his support.




49 Active. Lauda flagged deeperx (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Avirunes, TheUltraElite, Hhampuz, micgoossens, mosprognoz, N0sferatu. Opposed by dragonvslinux[/size]. - @Lutpin (not @Lauda) gives merit to the thread this Flag and the following flag cite.  The thread goes for 117 pages, so there is clearly substance to it with crypto-rainbow (following Flag) being cited in the OP, however, in one of those TL;DR moments, I can't find the accused @deeperx mentioned in the first page of the thread.

50 Active. Lauda flagged crypto-rainbow (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Avirunes, TheUltraElite, Hhampuz, micgoossens, DireWolfM14, mosprognoz, N0sferatu. Opposed by dragonvslinux[/size]. - the accused is the subject of the thread which has run for 117 pages.  Lauda didn't start the thread, so there is always the risk the flag will be voided if the thread were locked.

51 Active. Lauda flagged PHI1618 (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, mindrust, Vispilio, micgoossens. Opposed by mhanbostanci, TECSHARE, Quickseller, 2run, Matthias9515, PHI1618, Dogan86, zfrey, huseyin15, gospodin, vipganyan. - In this flag Lauda accuses two users, PHI1618 and BCT Staff member EFS, but only creates a flag on the soft target PHI1618.


Although Lauda creates the flag, he does not respond to any of the multiple questions put to him (including the accused PHI1618 responding to justify what he had done) concerning the accusation in the thread that was started on the 12th of June 2019.

52 Active. Lauda flagged MemoryDealers (type 3, see why). Supported by Foxpup, Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, infofront, yogg, mindrust, Hhampuz, HairyMaclairy, micgoossens, Hueristic, mosprognoz, GeoRW. Opposed by theymos, Stunna, malevolent, jbreher, Quickseller, MirkoIta, iwantapony, actisstupidname. - Lauda seems to falsely claim that he engaged in a contract with the accused (and is not the starter of the thread) - @theymos amongst others oppose the red flag.  The OP @TheNewAnon135246 has not created *any* flag against the accused who had not been online for nearly three months prior to the thread being started.

This seems to be the only one so far that has substance:

64 Active. Lauda flagged The-One-Above-All (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, owlcatz, babo, LFC_Bitcoin, yogg, o_solo_miner, TMAN, Lafu, micgoossens, bitmover, ChiBitCTy, DireWolfM14, 1miau, Timelord2067, IconFirm, mosprognoz, blurryeyed, cabalism13. Opposed by Quickseller, xolxol, The-One-Above-All, actisstupidname[/size]. - even @theymos supports the Flag.

---

Our running totals for the 13 Flags that Lauda has created:

Two Red flags which offer no proof - one of which he withdrew support.

Seven no reason/revenge , three users not mentioned in the fake flags out of thirteen studied flags.  Two actual accusations and one Lauda does not respond to questions with the majority of the flag's voters voting against.

---

Eleven out of thirteen Flags ~ 85% of Lauda's Flags are inaccurate when you look right into it.

Clearly an abuse,desperate moves from abuser you're power wont comeback,hopefully your colleagues should be removed too.

Thanks for your support - just a reminder that although this isn't a moderated thread I ask that now most of you have had your laugh that you please keep the posts civil.

---

Example eight, we go back to Flag 103:

103 Active. Lauda flagged sgbett (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Hhampuz, micgoossens, sgbett, GeoRW. Opposed by jbreher, MirkoIta[/size].

sgbett starts a thread Craig Wright recognised by US Govt as Satoshi, author of white paper and has been slapped with a Flag by Lauda for his troubles.

This is the OP:

---

Just for clarity, there are no flag creations by Lauda between Flag 103 and 284, so the running tally is (six no reason/revenge and two user not mentioned) fake flags out of eight studied flags.

If lauda was just making baseless flags that would be one thing, but they are clearly actively ignoring the pre-requisites for even creating the flag as laid out by the administration. Essentially lauda wants to make their own rules and refuses to operate within the community. It really depends on how you define discredited, but I would say that qualifies.

Continuing to count backwards

286 Active. Lauda flagged Thorecoin (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - Other than Lauda's one line (shit post?) Red Trust and flag of The OP Thorecoin (who has absolutely no other Trust Wall, good, bad, or indifferent). Lauda does not provide a reason why he believes Thorecoin requires a flag.


285 Active. Lauda flagged Pete550 (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. -  Pete550 has a 79 page thread - Lauda's post #1,570 quotes a source then makes this threat:


284 Active. Lauda flagged Dogedarkdev (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - While the thread Lauda cites discusses a potential scam, Dogedarkdev (the subject of the flag) is not mentioned even once in the thread, or the Reddit thread that is cited in the OP.

---

So far out of six Flags created by Lauda, four gives no reasons or are revenge flags while the remaining two flags the subject of the flag isn't even mentioned.

---

I've only just spotted this:

35 Insufficient support. (Withdrawn!) Lauda flagged Quickseller (type 3, see why). Supported by mosprognoz. Opposed by theymos, malevolent, qwk, redsn0w, Pamoldar, crwth, chimk, DdmrDdmr, TECSHARE, Quickseller, peloso, actisstupidname, BharatDEX, rakasss.


Likewise, I am sure.  (did it months ago)

Your Tiara is slipping Lauda.

This is unsurprising. I don’t doubt that forcing consensus for trust ratings (flags) will lead to lauda being discredited.

Khaos77 has very similar views as Kiklo. A member who has been permabanned from the forum. We can't prove it for sure; however, how many fanboys does zeitcoin really have?

Never name a cunt, don’t put the pussy on a pedestal

Well, I saw it was a TMAN post and read it a bit too quickly...

Fuck the PM, I am the new leader hostile takeover style

I don't think cults have elections. Maybe we'll get a PM telling us whom to worship.

But if that happens the cult will have to be renamed. I guess we can have elections for a new leader

The last one Khaos77 was registered here in January 2019, but the thread you referred was created in 2017 and I don't see any recent post on that thread.

A glitch in the matrix,
it sure must be,
now ~Lauda and fuck off.

Strange, reference threads are not related by any how. Is this abuse of the system?
I think Lauda somehow linked wrong threads or is it probably a bug?

Reserved #2

Reserved #1

So far I've come across three flags Lauda has created whereby the thread is not the subject of the flag or the UID isn't even mentioned in the thread.

http://loyce.club/trust/flags/35.html

304 Active. Lauda flagged xolxol (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - Lauda appears to have engaged in Trust (Flag) abuse after xolxol posted this in their thread.

294 Active. Lauda flagged proudhon (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by nobody. - proudhon makes one post which is replied to by another poste of the thread in a civil manor. (If the thread is so bad, how come the OP wasn't flagged??)

288 Active. Lauda flagged Khaos77 (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda. Opposed by Khaos77[/size]. - Khaos77 doesn't even post in the thread and is not mentioned.

---

I don't have time tonight to review more of Lauda's Flags, but to me it seems he is using the Flag system to punish others.  What's @theymos' position on the creation of Flags?