Topic: Nutildah -willing to facilitate scammers for around 300bucks?? deleting evidence (Read 1568 times)

Nutildah of bitcointalk  is still abusing the trust system.

He is making false claims about me.

He is also a proven scammer facilitator for pay who tries to edit his post history to hide his past financially motivated wrong doing.

Yes the guy is pure scum.
I will be creating my own thread on him soon.

A willing scam facilitator for pay should not be sponsored by fortunejack or any sponsor.
We should all make sure that no sponsor touches these types of willing scam facilitators for pay
Nutildah also is now preventing honest members receiving valuable warnings about his scammer friend lauda
This vile scum bag needs removal

He got busted https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anntao-tao-altmarket-fanmix-real-solutions-for-the-music-industry-1567647

CryptoTwitter got him

This is a good idea I think willing scam facilitators should be tagged and flagged

So, tell us again why YOU haven't tagged them?

Seems now that we debunked nutildahs friends excuses.... why has he still not been given red trust for willing scam facilitating for pay now caught trying to delete the evidence or mutate into a bunch of excuses that shield the original details of it all.

How is this clearly not financially motivated wrong doing?? get this filthy piece of scam facilitating shit red tagged. I see no valid reason for this person not to have a scam tag?

direwolf and mikey seem incapable to understand a very basic and undeniable FACT.


1. nutildah is certain that selling your account will lead to scamming  READ THE FUCKING QUOTED POSTS FROM 2014

He feels so certain about it and so strongly, he is sayng he will start his own thread about account sellers to make sure they are pariahs ( because they are evil and facilitating scams)

2. If you are certain selling your account will lead to people getting scammed then you are willingly to facilitate scamming for a Price  IN THIS INSTANCE 0.3 BTC


How can this be difficult to understand?

It is quite possible that people lack the capacity to understand this simple concept but they should not be on DT.

HAVE YOU EVEN READ THE POSTS NUTILDAH MADE BEFORE TRYING TO SELL HIS OWN ACCOUNT??

If you have and are still incapable of seeing why this person is undeniably financially high risk then you both should not be on DT or making any kind of decisions of influence on this forum.



There can be NO DENYING that nutildah

1. believes firmly account selling leads to scamming and facilitates scams which he feels strongly is wrong and EVIL

2. that although he believes this to be wrong and evil  HE IS STILL GOING TO DO IT FOR A PRICE.



Mikeys argument seems to have gone off on a tangent and seems as always to be mutating into a different scenario.  What if a scammer says, I did not want to scam. I just wanted to make money period. If there was another way to make the same money or I just got that amount of money handed to me for doing nothing I would have rather done that. DOES THAT MAKE IT OKAY??

The clear intention is this... Let me try and break it down.


1. I am certain that selling my account will facilitate scamming ( confirmed by 2014 posts)
2. I am willing to punish others selling accounts even starting my own thread because I am so certain it is EVIL to sell your account (confirmed by 2014 posts)
3. In light of 1&2  I will still be willing to sell my account for 0.3 BTC (confirmed by 2016 posts)

there really is no OTHER way to see it.


trying to bring in the changing attitudes of the board ONLY MAKES IT WORSE FOR NUTILDAH...

2014 - majority said it was okay  - nutildah is 100% sure it is facilitating scams and evil.

2016 - many now realizing it does facilitate scamming - nutildah if paid 0.3 btc believes now ? haha  

can you not see how foolish your arguments of defense are?  Please bring SS here so he can help you alter the meaning of words that may help?




If you are sure doing something is wrong and it will harm others but you will still do it for a price........how the fuck can anyone ever trust you again?

You would NOT be giving this protection to any non DT.

These specious arguments of defense are really poor and transparent.


Why is he not tagged? because as Laudas feltching clown and vods  posts have confirmed.... we dare not act against the central colluding group or it will negatively impact upon us. ( confirmed)

Not true, his intention was to make money, period

To "facilitate scamming" is a very possible outcome/consequence that may follow later on,  if he wanted to scam he would have used account to trade and probably get a bit more than his account would sell for.

Now, if he really did scam someone and went away with it, then you would make perfect sense on why isn't he tagged, now for the purpose of this debate, let's assume he really did sell his account and whoever uses the account now is not the same guy back in 2016, the questions to be asked are

1- Did the new guy scam anyone?
2- Did the account's posts turn into useless spam?

if not, then what difference does it really make if it's the guy who created the account or it's someone from the other side of the world? as far as "scam" is concerned, it does not really matter.

you see I can give you a million reasons of why his account shouldn't be tagged, while I can also give you the same amount of reasons on why must his account be tagged, but that wouldn't change a thing, DT members happened to agree on not to tag his account.

There is really no other way of looking at it, there is no super power he has which keeps protecting him, at the time there was no DT / Merit gang, nobody would have protected him, it just happened , stop trying to make up reasons for it.


True, but there is now more than what, 100 , 200 ? DT members, non of them thinks that account deserve a tag, I hope you don't think that all current DT members are afraid of him or some stupid shit like that.

It's really quite amazing how reasonable you can sound at times.  I wish you would make points this valid in every post you make, and not bury them in walls of rubbish and petty attacks.

I don't think anyone is claiming that Nutildah wasn't wrong when he attempted to sell his account.  But put it all into context.  Around 2016 was right around the time when the forum community started seeing account selling as a negative thing for the health of forum and the bitcoin community.  Nutildah said flat out in this original post that he had not been spending so much time on the forum, so it's reasonable to conclude that he may not have known about the change in attitude.  That naivete is mostly confirmed by the fact that he posted right from his account which he attempted to sell.  The first reply to his offer suggesting that he should have created a sock puppet didn't even occur to him, probably because he had no ill intent.  Once informed about his potential for getting the account tagged red, he was wise enough to put two and two together.

I'm speaking in generalities because I don't know exactly what went on in Nutildah's head, but I can put myself in his situation.  It's seems fairly clear to me that Nutildah isn't proud of having made that mistake, as naive as it may have been.  He's probably embarrassed about it.  In fact, the reason he edit the post in August is probably due to his embarrassment.  Again, generalities because I don't know for sure.  He hasn't commented so I can't be certain.

And like Mikey said, one needs to consider the behavior of the individual since the mistake was made.  Can you just try to see it from his perspective?  Can you bring yourself to forgive him?  If you can at least try maybe your forum life will be filled with less turmoil and drama going forward.

Mikey that was a reasonable post but let me try and make it a bit easier to follow- this is not just about account selling is it?

Imagine someone who wants to facilitate scamming for a price and just keep that in mind.... I see the connection between the two instances  1/ certainty that selling and account will result in facilitate scamming and is evil)  2/ then selling the account is obviously the stumbling block.

CLEAR INTENTION TO FACILITATE SCAMMING FOR A PRICE KEEP THAT IN MIND.



Wrong doings by some DT members need to be kept in check by other DT members  THAT IS THE POINT. Not to collude together and say well we let it slide for them but not for others.

It is either your statement is wrong or LLec was able to see the future , I would pretty much like to believe the latter is wrong.

---

Now to me personally I would justify the actions of some users based on other facts, contribution to the forum is one thing I would take very seriously , not only regarding trust or flags, even when it comes to breaking the forum rules, if we take philipma1957 for an example, a great member who gave so much to the community and to bitcoin in general, say someone dug into his old posts and found a plagiarized post , or a post of him selling his account a few years back , would it be wise to treat him the same way a shit-poster newbie is to be treated? Sure not.

The same thing applies to everyone else, if the member in question did contribute to the forum before and after the "account sale" post , I can see how those DT members who actively tag account sellers would justify not tagging a certain user, but again this has to be widely applied in a fair manner and not selectively based on who we like and who we don't.

Unfortunately, the trust system is not being used by bots, so it makes sense that you should expect some wrong doings from some DT members, as long as it is kept at "minimal" and you don't see it happen every day, then nothing much to worry about IMO.

Look it is clearly apparent from your posts that you are pretty low functioning. However even some servile dreg of your level can NOT fail to understand this is NOT a simple case of account selling is it you moronic fuck.

Most people may view account selling as merely handing their account to someone that wants to be a hero or legend just for the prestige or whatever?

AS WE KEEP REPEATING'

Nutildah WAS CERTAIN that selling your account resulted in people getting scammed and that it was EVIL (HAVE ANOTHER FUCKING READ MORON)

If you are THEN willing to sell your account FULLY CERTAIN that you are facilitating scammers and are acting in an EVIL manner for such a small amount  THEN YOU ARE FINANCIALLY HIGH RISK.
How can it be otherwise??

SO STRONGLY did he feel about protecting the board from these scam facilitators and evil doers HE WAS GOING TO START HIS OWN THREAD HUNTING THEM DOWN SO THAT NOBODY WOULD DEAL WITH THEM AND MAKE THEM PARIAHS...

Got it you dire posting dreg. Your posts are generally net negative garbage. Stick to flipping your burgers.

Stick to posting silly little gifs and kissing ass for merits,since that is pretty much all you're capable of.

Nobody gives one fuck about your inclusions and exclusions - scammer supporters and low functioning shit posters opinions are as worthless as foxpoops (who is also a scammer supporter anyway). Notice how when challenged he admits his opinions of whom should be on DT are not even based on reasoning Hahahaha .. Oh yeah wasn't this about excluding the same member yes it was.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52479030

He will pop up here any moment since he loves our posts

What sort of scamming wretches and their low functioning feltching dregs has theymos allowed this board be handed over to.

In light of this knowledge ANYONE including these types of people on DT should have red trust and be blacklisted from DT.

I don't think people should be punished for simply trading accounts, even Nutilduhh. You have to first have principles to abandon them, and a lot of the DT doesn't qualify. You can opine about what you would do in hypotheticals all day, in reality you reserve criticism of those who have the ability to inhibit your own status within this system in favor of low hanging fruit you know it is safe to pick because they approve it. The way I pick my trust list is no different than anyone else regardless of the targeted fabrications you fell for and participated in. Of course any scrutiny is reserved for people like myself who must explain every action on their trust list, while any time one of the chosen are questioned, it is just "their right" to choose who they want and that's the end of it.

Is it just me that has abandoned his principals?  Or is just my principals that concern you so much?  Or is it that my principals are of such concern to you because mine was the deciding vote that cast you out of DT1 most recently?  What is it about me that is bothering you so much lately?  Really Tecshare, can't I make a lighthearted joke about about the way some one continues to beat a horse's fossil?

Would you prefer if I chastise Nutildah for trying to sell his account?  Again?  Okay; Hey Nutildah, you shouldn't have tried to sell your account.  Oh, what's that you say?  You learned that lesson nearly two years before I joined this forum?  Okay, then.  Carry on.

And you are wrong about my character yet again.  I'm a very forgiving person.  If you had made a similar mistake years ago, and quickly adjusted your position, not only would you have my forgiveness, you'd also have my support if others attacked you for it.  

However, considering the way you build your trust list you still wouldn't be included in mine.  There're connections, and also disconnections.

Anyway, we can take this discussion to another thread, or PM if you'd rather.  I feel like this is going off-topic.

I think you might be better of selling your ass.

I think you might be better off selling your account.

This is a perfect example of abandoning your principles to appease those in control. You are only willing to criticize approved popular targets and never those who are in "the club". If this was a post I had made trying to sell my account, you would be in your clown suit and enthusiastically preparing the bonfire for my reputation, every once and a while looking back to see if your masters are still pleased. I am especially disappointed in you because you know better and still choose to kneel.

When Nutidah farts, cryptohunter be like

You will find that we were ATTACKED FIRST . This is undeniable.

I'm not sure highlighting observable instances of clear financial wrong doing of those in positions of trust should be called ATTACKING. I mean would you claim the police detective ATTACKED those criminals that were recorded on your CC TV by repeatedly presenting the evidence until they were prosecuted? I mean that seems a strange term to use really? You could rather say presenting observable instances of wrong doing to protect other members.

When people attack you or your property over and over, some will just accept and walk away, perhaps even move house. Others should try to make a stand so that those attacking know there will be a price to pay. Even better if you can bring about some changes that will prevent them and any others repeating such attacks.

If nobody makes a stand, things just tend to get worse.

Somethings have improved, others have sadly gone the other way. Still the board is excellent enough in other sections to still make it worth while fighting for improvements and preventing the destruction of free speech here.