Topic: OGnasty removing the scam tags from a scammer? if they remove his tags ?? - page 2. (Read 1319 times)

Interesting move og, after all the big talk.. says a lot about what your word is worth.

Is there a part of the conversation where I was called out and you were not?   Nope.  You do love to post pms... so post it!

Cherry picking again....

I witnessed OG be set in his place.  He had no choice but to remove his ratings for Lauda.


The dog is now claiming to be better than his master?

QS, you have no hope of ever getting onto DT - OG does.  That is why he caved.

I don’t trust Vods words for a number of reasons, not only from his recent interactions with you.

I don’t have irrefutable proof that can be public, however the evidence in the public domain would lead a reasonable person to suggest that a number of people were pressured into removing ratings against each other, that included some legitimate ratings and some retaliatory ratings that are inappropriate, and perhaps some ratings that were left for personal reasons.

According to everyone who has posted about what happened, theymos was involved In discussions, and I cannot think of any other reasonable way everyone involved could have been strong armed into removing their ratings. Everyone involved is also still calling everyone they removed ratings for a scammer (who has spoken), if not using stronger language than before. Theymos has his fingerprints on the situation and I think others can come to their own conclusions based on the above facts.

I would not have removed my rating against lauda under any circumstances that doesn’t involve substantial evidence of his evidence.

One can reasonably compare lauda to TradeFortress. If my memory serves me correctly regarding what I have read about the inputs scam, TF refunded the majority of money deposited into inputs, refunded the entire deposit amount of large depositors (investors), and only a small percentage (0%?) of small deposits under a certain threshold. I also believe that there were claims TF was using the trust system to silence people critical of him until he was ultimately removed from being on DT1.

In the escrow transaction that lauda was involved in (that was non-transparent), a mixture of bitcoin and various altcoins were deposited into escrow that was strongly implied to be 2-of-3 multisig with 3 escrows each holding one of the private keys. The altcoins were converted into bitcoin via exchanges, however the amount sent back to escrow was well below what would be expected, based on the *low* of exchange rates in the several time periods after the various alts were deposited into exchanges. The discrepancy was in excess of a million dollars based on exchange rates at the time. I also strongly believe that the private keys required to sign the various transactions to spend the money in escrow were controlled by one person.

The project ended up failing and those who invested were due refunds. IIRC refunds were given based on how many tokens were purchased. After the ICO sale, and after the altcoins were converted into bitcoin, nearly all altcoin values declined substantially, so the ICO investors likely ended up in a better position than if they owned the tokens and if they had owned their various altcoins they used to invest in the project, both even after accounting for the discrepancy. As such, less people complained than would otherwise be expected. However it still appears money was stolen. The majority of money was returned to investors.

When there are million dollar discrepancies in transactions, a promise for a similar situation not to happen again is insufficient. It is necessary to leave a negative rating warning others about the incident. Period. If TF promised not to offer deposit services that gets “hacked” again, it would be wholly inappropriate to remove his negative ratings. If Mark Kaapolis (or however his name is spelled— the person in charge of Gox) returned saying that he promises not to “lose” a billion dollars worth of customer money, it would be inappropriate to remove the ratings warning others against depositing money with him. Lauda and friends currently use the trust system to silence their critics.

The primary difference between lauda and TF (and Gox) is that TF admitted he didn’t return all the money owed to depositors. Lauda on the other hand refused to admit not all money was returned and refused to answer any questions about what happened to the money. Perhaps this is a lesson to scammers that if you refuse to answer questions about any missing money, you won’t be held accountable for any missing money.

I would rather be labeled a scammer (incorrectly) and excluded up the wazoo than be prohibited from warning others about his previous scammy behavior.

Everyone removed tags all at once, but OG is claiming he removed them because he wants the drama to stop.   

Vod was only included in the part of the conversation where his behavior was called out.  The conversation between theymos and I, and later Lauda, was much different.  Vod literally doesn't know what he's talking about.  He's trying to move the conversation to this thread because he was caught in so many lies, that at this point it's clear the dude is having some sort of mental and emotional breakdown.  I honestly don't think any reasonable person could believe anything Vod states ever again after reading the below thread.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vod-is-a-liar-extortionist-get-him-out-of-dt-5136576

Vod, put your money where your mouth is and I'll prove you're a liar again.  Calling out your lies is turning into a full time job, so it seems only fair you put up or shut up.

Are you saying theymos was threatening to blacklist OgN from DT1 if he didn’t remove his negative rating?

OGnasty removed his rating towards Lauda so he wouldn't be restricted from future DT1 membership - it has nothing to do with peace or control of Lauda.  It was out of his control.

Unless you want everyone believe that this wave of forgiveness just suddenly was created by you?  OG seems to be the only one receiving punishment and still making it look like he is the good guy.

 

Lauda removed my rating, and I then gave Lauda an ultimatum if my forgiveness is to be earned.  Lauda chose to make a promise and I will hold Lauda to that promise.  I believe this was the best way to eliminate questionable actions moving forward.  If I am proven wrong, changes will be made.  I think after so many years, a new approach might be beneficial to everyone.

Obviously I don't remove ratings just because others removed theirs.  Look at all the times minifrij has deleted trust ratings on my account, apologized to me, and then replaced them when I don't reciprocate. 

With Lauda, I was in a position where in order to be fair in my ratings, I would also need to leave negative trust ratings for Blazed and minerjones.  I didn't want to do that, (even though they both definitely assisted in a scam with Lauda) because I think it would do more damage to the community than it would help.  Instead, I have Lauda's word that these types of non-transparent public escrows will never happen again.  We'll see how good that word is, but in my opinion if forgiveness is what stops these scams from occurring in the future where negative trust hasn't, then I'm happy to walk the path that keeps people from being scammed.  If that opens me up to more attacks, then so be it.  At this point it's odd when I wake up and don't read outrageous lies about me.  I've come to think of it as the way these damaged misguided individuals show me love, as thought is love's currency.

My question to you mr above all, do you want to see ICO escrow scams and extortions stop here, or do you want to see Lauda punished?  If you want to see ICO escrow scams stop, then give peace a chance.  If you want to see Lauda punished, then go to the police with evidence of what occurred.  Trying to make it seem like I have any motive other than making this community safe is you heading in the wrong direction.  You're fighting people trying to help make this a better place. 

So you both had a chat and at the end you BOTH removed each others scam tags?  him removing yours was not part of the deal?

Let's say that anyone could possibly believe that if lauda left your scam tag you would still remove yours?

How about you answer why in light of the numerous observable instances of lying, scamming, extorting, shady escrow, and flagrant trust abuses against many?  how a simple " i won't do it again"  is enough that you feel it is responsible and ethical for you to place the entire board at risk from a person with such a track record?

You do understand to many it will appear you sold out here and that it will be a constant stain on your reputation. It certainly would appear that you have made a deal with the devil here.

It is impossible for someone to be that SURE that lauda et al are untrustworthy scum then on the mere word of that untrustworthy scum suddenly decide in 1 conversation ( one in which they removed your scam tags that you know were trust abuse anyway) they are now trustworthy and you feel they deserve to shine with glowing green trust?  

Nobody just takes the word of someone with so many instances of observable lies, scamming, trust abuse, extortion, and shady escrow they will not do it again. This is ridiculous.

You got bored of waiting for Theymos to undo their abuse, you realize they are entrenched within the broken and gamed systems and decided if you can not beat them you will join them. I don't mean you will join in scamming and lying with them but you decided to no longer fight against them. Poor move.

This sets a precedent that ANYONE can say they will not do it again after multiple observable attempts to fuck people over and it is all okay again. If Lauda has no scam tag nobody should have a scam tag.

You certainly didn't remove it because you don't want to be part of the reason that negativity is thriving on these boards.  Your ego would not allow you to remove them without some reason...  

You weren’t included in that part of the convo and it is explicitly stated that is not the reason. Lauda can confirm, or if you want to put your money where your mouth is this time I’ll prove you’re full of shit once again.

If you were part of the conversation, you would have PMs to prove this, correct?

Yes you did.   I was part of the convo, liar.  


Again, you'll need to seriously cherry pick a PM to prove that one.... 

I did not remove the tag because Lauda removed mine. I stopped reading after that.

I think when someone engages in multiple transgressions over a period of years, a "promise" not to do it again is not credible.

More importantly, when there is a million dollars plus unaccounted for (IMO stolen), this is not something that should be forgiven.

An observable scammer, liar, trust abuser and one implicated in extortion and shady escrow dealings where huge sums are unaccounted for LAUDA?? just gets a free pass from Ognasty now so long as they remove his own red tags?

Ognasty ONLY.

Ognasty's explanation.

"Addressing your concern, Lauda has given me their word that things like non-transparent escrows and extorting users in the name of investigations will not happen again."

This is interesting...You get to extort people and then say you will not do it again and that's it red tags removed?? okay.

How about the other solid observable instances of LAUDA lying for financial gain (scamming)?? Did you miss the evidence we presented 100x already? do you not notice his trust abuse?

You get to scam people then say: Yeah, I won't do it again, and now you are trustworthy? WTF is this place?

So let's leave the entire board vulnerable to a bunch of observable liars, scammers, trust abusers and general dirt bags so you can "hopefully" get in with them?  because they promised not to do it again after already looking to have pulled NUMEROUS shady stunts?

Ognasty it is on topic here so you are free to discuss it at length so we can understand why you feel it appropriate to remove legitimate scam tags from someone that has pulled NUMEROUS shady dealings and some confirmed observable lies, scamming and trust abuse?

If lauda does not deserve tags the NOBODY deserves tags.

 

I mean if you can not tag someone with all of this combined dirt on them and large scale financial issue especially like the escrow and the observable lies and scamming you will never be able to red trust anyone again it would seem.

Is it really ethical to expose the board to this kind of person when you are in full knowledge of what they are like?  forgive and forget fair enough but exposing the board and leaving members vulnerable is not ethical.

This is not to call into question Ognasty in terms of being untrustworthy financially speaking, however we would like to debate with him in public if it is ethical to leave the forum exposed to persons he has correctly recognized as very untrustworthy on numerous occasions?

We leave these here to demonstrate the issues here