Topic: [PUMP AND DUMP] Signatum is just another clonecoin scam targeting naive noobs - page 4. (Read 14891 times)

Hm According to the Signatum thread it is a "fairly launched" coin  ...
OCminer listed the coin...
The coin is listed on exchange "cryptopia"  
And I noticed some sockpuppets of user "Digitalindustry"   (for the people who don't know who is "digitalindustry" https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/digitalindustry-aka-kolin-evans-busted-on-planning-a-scam-781954)

I think I can add Signatum to my list. It would not surprise me if Signatum is from the same copy coin cloner:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/potential-pump-and-dump-coins-created-by-one-copy-coin-clown-1966967

He is not.

There is no such thing as "repeated scamming posts".

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on who you ask.

That's the whole idea behind the trust system, "self-proclaimed" ratings based on the view of the individual users. You are free to tag someone for something, or free to not do so (although DT comes with a *implied responsibility*, but this is not the thread to discuss that).

Nobody in their right mind, with an IQ that surpasses that of a monkey, could honestly state such a thing. Sure, you can choose random scam/shit coins hoping to profit. However, making one of such your "personal favorite" is a huge warning sign.

I don't think you will find plenty of people, those with actual seniority and knowledge regarding the trust system, that will agree with you on that.

Trust ratings are not moderated unless there is extreme abuse (and in this case, they can only be removed by Theymos). This is not such a case, not even close.

  Wondered how long it would take before I received a negative status, this @CryptoDevil honestly thinks anybody cares about the trust rating on bitcoin talk?. The fact that he does clearly indicates he must live in an authoritarian, possibly dictatorial country, where people are easily subdued by threats or reprisal.

You have allowed yourself to freely express your opinion, and spam on any thread, and yet you feel that nobody has the right to contest or counter that opinion, wake up.

You could give me the maximum amount of negative status, it really would not matter to me or anyone else, so please continue. As a matter of fact i challenge you to give me the MAXIMUM possible, I would really appreciate that, it makes me stand out more in the talk threads, as a matter of fact even with this that you have already gifted, i still stand out, "Infamy and Fame walk hand in hand"

Ironic that you have actually drawn more attention, to the users you where ultimately trying to silence  

My only concern is I don't think you will have the powers invested, to give me more, I feel i may be talking to a false Devil.

So if you don't mind, at your earliest convenience could you please give me the maximum level of negative trust, I know your a busy kid giving everybody else negatives but if you could please fast track my order for more i would greatly appreciate that.

Kind regards.

Lord Epicyclic
 
PS. I am not Joking, I need at least -50

thanks ; i'll stay away

Yeah I might do that at some point but at this time I'm trying to get a feel for which accounts are definitely sock-puppets and which are just gullible newbie fanbois suffering from 'sunk-cost' fallacy. So I tend to tag a bunch I have good reason to suspect are the scammer accounts and then can usually gauge from the subsequent behaviour whether they are.

It is clear that Signatum is merely their current scam-of-choice, as there are obvious connections to some other clonecoin scams they are involved in, such as 'Virta Unique Coin' and 'Altcommunity', which appear to have been left on hold while they play this one out for all they can get.

I'm also seeing suggestions of involvement with something called 'chaincoin' and a couple of others but, frankly, there are so many that at some point you just have to accept the limitations of what can actually be done to stop it and focus mostly on alerting newbies to the facts. I do remember during 2015 when a plethora of ridiculously-named coins were coming out, like 'Gorilla Bucks' with ticker names like 'NANAS', and thinking at the time that the scammers were simply taking the piss at that point and weren't even bothering to create credible-sounding projects.

Any altcoin marketing itself with a *new hash* should be a huge red flag. It's probable that <1% of the people on this forum understand why.

This reminds me of a case, where the shills were faking conversations by spamming (seemingly coherent) one-liners in order to cover up any criticism raised against the project. As I've written in the thread, you should summarize a list of account that need to be tagged.