Q: Should Lauda *really* be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no - page 5.

gorgon666

member

Activity: 92

Merit: 10

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on December 10, 2016, 03:24:37 PM

^^^This is not a thread where alts should be piling in to artificially reinforce a position, either. Just sayin'.

Which alts are piling in to artificially reinforce a position?

Quote from: tspacepilot on December 01, 2016, 07:17:12 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on November 30, 2016, 02:01:37 PM

Lauda is selling her signature space at elevated rates. Lauda is also leaving negative ratings for accounts most likely to wish to join signature campaigns under the guise of leaving negative ratings for spammers (not scammers), and alts of scammers without properly vetting the information. By leaving negative ratings for accounts likely to wish to sell their signature, she is reducing the number of potential sellers of signature space, increasing the value of her signature space.

Lauda is also selling her services as a signature campaign manager and has similar conflicts.

Maybe Quickseller is having a hard time selling signature space these days (-117 trust!). Or maybe Lauda is neg-repping all his alts? I dunno.

I admit I do find it satisfying that while QS can still troll and troll and troll, at least no one takes it seriously anymore. Can you guys believe this dude was once on default trust?

Please stop posting nonsense in this thread. Just because you are writing a worthless school paper on speech analysis does not make you an expert in figuring out who is behind various online identities.

The Sceptical Chymist

legendary

Activity: 3332

Merit: 6809

Cashback 15%

^^^This is not a thread where alts should be piling in to artificially reinforce a position, either. Just sayin'.

gorgon666

member

Activity: 92

Merit: 10

Quote from: minifrij on November 30, 2016, 06:07:55 AM

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:52:37 AM

There is not a single DAX 30 or a FTSE 100 company that will let someone "press a few buttons" regarding a transaction/decision involving themselves.

The majority of the time, the person will not even participate in the discussion regarding this kind of discussion, therefore the mere suggestion that a thread about you should be moderated is inappropriate.

There is no solid evidence that the alleged discussion took place before to the moderation action.

Remind me why this is relevant whatsoever? All Lauda did was move the topic to where it belonged, something that would have been done by another moderator had Lauda not. They didn't remove or censor the topic, not even obstructing it from view (as there is a trail that can be followed to find it's new location).

Lauda should not have even participated in the discussion regarding if the thread should have been moved, or where it should have been moved. By participating in the discussion, she is unduly influencing a decision that will affect her directly.

BTW the thread was complaining about the behavior of a staff member, and asking for that staff member to be removed from being staff, that sounds more like a thread for meta don't you think?

tspacepilot

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1078

I may write code in exchange for bitcoins.

Quote from: Quickseller on November 30, 2016, 02:01:37 PM

Lauda is selling her signature space at elevated rates. Lauda is also leaving negative ratings for accounts most likely to wish to join signature campaigns under the guise of leaving negative ratings for spammers (not scammers), and alts of scammers without properly vetting the information. By leaving negative ratings for accounts likely to wish to sell their signature, she is reducing the number of potential sellers of signature space, increasing the value of her signature space.

Lauda is also selling her services as a signature campaign manager and has similar conflicts.

Maybe Quickseller is having a hard time selling signature space these days (-117 trust!). Or maybe Lauda is neg-repping all his alts? I dunno.

I admit I do find it satisfying that while QS can still troll and troll and troll, at least no one takes it seriously anymore. Can you guys believe this dude was once on default trust?

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Mitchell on November 30, 2016, 08:07:55 AM

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:15:23 AM

Chat logs are worthless and can be doctored.

But I really did tell Lauda that. Sad

And this will be ignored by OP.

Quote from: Quickseller on December 01, 2016, 02:16:26 PM

Lauda is also very inconsistent in who gets a negative rating and who gets a neutral rating as he is leaving both negative and neutral ratings for the exact same activity, that reasonably does not warrant a rating at all.

That is most certainly not the case. In order to understand, you'd have to look into the ratings rather than just make a superficial observation and jump to conclusions. All ratings are handed out on a case-by-case basis, i.e. several factors are considered (e.g. history of account, potential risk, post quality, et al.). For example, the three accounts that are being sold and have received neutral ratings did so because they are 'non-spammy' accounts (which is a rare event on its own).

FYI I'm not the only person tagging for the activates of spamming, account trading and whatnot, but you don't seem to care about those as much as you care about me.
P.S. Minifrij still got some unanswered questions that you seem to be dodging.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: Vod on November 30, 2016, 08:41:37 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on November 30, 2016, 02:01:37 PM

By leaving negative ratings for accounts likely to wish to sell their signature, she is reducing the number of potential sellers of signature space, increasing the value of her signature space.

By jumping into the ocean, there is a chance I could create a tsunami too.

That's quite a grasp, even for someone like you.

http://imgur.com/a/lKccW

There is >an entire screen worth of negative ratings left by Lauda that Lauda is not even attempting to say that they are scammers but are trying to sell their signature space.

Lauda is also very inconsistent in who gets a negative rating and who gets a neutral rating as he is leaving both negative and neutral ratings for the exact same activity, that reasonably does not warrant a rating at all.

Lauda is stretching the definition of who deserves a negative rating to much farther then who even trolls leave negative ratings for (let along anyone reputable) and all of the additional people that Lauda is leaving negative ratings for generally want to sell their signature space.

suchmoon

legendary

Activity: 3654

Merit: 8909

https://bpip.org

I'm making this post to redirect eyeballs from Quickseller's signature to mine. Let's have the fucking hypocrite sue me for lost revenue.

Vod

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 3010

Licking my boob since 1970

Quote from: Quickseller on November 30, 2016, 02:01:37 PM

By leaving negative ratings for accounts likely to wish to sell their signature, she is reducing the number of potential sellers of signature space, increasing the value of her signature space.

By jumping into the ocean, there is a chance I could create a tsunami too.

That's quite a grasp, even for someone like you.

Lutpin

copper member

Activity: 1876

Merit: 1874

Goodbye, Z.

Quote from: izanagi narukami on November 30, 2016, 06:39:49 AM

so for the solution, staff forum make their own initiative so fight spam and improved post quality forum so Lauda and team build their SMAS and ACE project

SMAS is not an initiative coming from staff. SMAS was initiated by yahoo and a few other campaign managers.
Lauda only recently became a part of SMAS.

ACE btw isn't related to staff aswell. It's a project running seperately from Achows and Laudas positions as moderators.

Quote from: izanagi narukami on November 30, 2016, 06:39:49 AM

In one side : Lauda team consider as monopolize all campaign

Not sure when SMAS became the "lauda team", but let me answer to this aswell.
We cooperate in the aspect of fighting spam, and that's it.
Every user of SMAS is making their own decisions besides that. We work independently, and we are for hire independently.
If an advertiser choses to hire a smas-manager or a non smas-manager is their decision. Further, which of us they hire, if they go for smas, is aswell.

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

SMAS - It is only purpose is to bully/force advertisers and to use SMAS members as managers.

Where exactly do we force anyone to hire one of us?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2870

Merit: 2298

Quote from: Jemzx00 on November 30, 2016, 12:56:22 PM

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 08:27:34 AM

Quote from: Lauda on November 30, 2016, 07:22:37 AM

~Snipped~

You can deny all you want. But your actions speaks for itself. Your actions is only further your own interest. If you are a true spam advocate, I dare you to remove yourself from ACE and SMAS. That's the only way for us to believe you are a true spam advocate and not an impostor.

I don't know how leaving on SMAS or ACE will clarify things on what Lauda's doing. Somehow Lauda being on those groups makes her a true spam advocate. She even help these groups to find spammer by being campaign manager. By the way, I'm actually on the spam list of Lauda on SMAS and that pissed me off but instead of contradicting her decision, why not try to prove that you really are not a spammer. Somehow I respect her position and her trust rating here on this forum.

Lauda is selling her signature space at elevated rates. Lauda is also leaving negative ratings for accounts most likely to wish to join signature campaigns under the guise of leaving negative ratings for spammers (not scammers), and alts of scammers without properly vetting the information. By leaving negative ratings for accounts likely to wish to sell their signature, she is reducing the number of potential sellers of signature space, increasing the value of her signature space.

Lauda is also selling her services as a signature campaign manager and has similar conflicts.

Jemzx00

hero member

Activity: 1470

Merit: 546

Be nice!

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 08:27:34 AM

Quote from: Lauda on November 30, 2016, 07:22:37 AM

~Snipped~

You can deny all you want. But your actions speaks for itself. Your actions is only further your own interest. If you are a true spam advocate, I dare you to remove yourself from ACE and SMAS. That's the only way for us to believe you are a true spam advocate and not an impostor.

I don't know how leaving on SMAS or ACE will clarify things on what Lauda's doing. Somehow Lauda being on those groups makes her a true spam advocate. She even help these groups to find spammer by being campaign manager. By the way, I'm actually on the spam list of Lauda on SMAS and that pissed me off but instead of contradicting her decision, why not try to prove that you really are not a spammer. Somehow I respect her position and her trust rating here on this forum.

whothefuckareyou

jr. member

Activity: 49

Merit: 10

Quote from: Lauda on November 30, 2016, 07:22:37 AM

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:52:37 AM

There is not a single DAX 30 or a FTSE 100 company..

False equivalency.

Quote from: izanagi narukami on November 30, 2016, 06:39:49 AM

In one side : Lauda team consider as monopolize all campaign

What is "Lauda team" and how exactly does it monopolize campaigns?

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

Lauda is only doing this to earn more bitcoins from monopolizing signature campaigns.

And the baseless accusations continue.

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

ACE - Only benefits Lauda and buddies and alts.

ACE predates my involvement in campaigns as a manager, and my involvement with SMAS. The idea behind ACE has no relevance to this. Every single (active) ACE member is verifiably a real person (i.e. coin collector), which can't be said for any other campaign.

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

SMAS - It is only purpose is to bully/force advertisers and to use SMAS members as managers.

We can't neither force nor bully someone to hire people participating in SMAS.

Quote from: Decoded on November 30, 2016, 06:41:23 AM

Repost that on your main, why dont you?

They probably have so many accounts that figuring out which one is the 'main' is a tough process. Tongue

You can deny all you want. But your actions speaks for itself. Your actions is only further your own interest. If you are a true spam advocate, I dare you to remove yourself from ACE and SMAS. That's the only way for us to believe you are a true spam advocate and not an impostor.

Mitchell

copper member

Activity: 3948

Merit: 2201

Verified awesomeness ✔

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:15:23 AM

Chat logs are worthless and can be doctored.

But I really did tell Lauda that. Sad

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:15:23 AM

You did handle the thread yourself regardless of if "DeepSpace" told you it belongs somewhere else.

I told Lauda move it to `Reputation` because that is where it belongs. I didn't have time myself as I have plenty of other things to do and now they are being attacked because of that? That's not very nice.

If someone does not agree with the move feel free to say so and be sure to back it up with proof. It does not belong in `Scam Accustations` because it's about trust ratings, which is a reputation matter and thus belongs in `Reputation`.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:52:37 AM

There is not a single DAX 30 or a FTSE 100 company..

False equivalency.

Quote from: izanagi narukami on November 30, 2016, 06:39:49 AM

In one side : Lauda team consider as monopolize all campaign

What is "Lauda team" and how exactly does it monopolize campaigns?

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

Lauda is only doing this to earn more bitcoins from monopolizing signature campaigns.

And the baseless accusations continue.

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

ACE - Only benefits Lauda and buddies and alts.

ACE predates my involvement in campaigns as a manager, and my involvement with SMAS. The idea behind ACE has no relevance to this. Every single (active) ACE member is verifiably a real person (i.e. coin collector), which can't be said for any other campaign.

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 07:10:51 AM

SMAS - It is only purpose is to bully/force advertisers and to use SMAS members as managers.

We can't neither force nor bully someone to hire people participating in SMAS.

Quote from: Decoded on November 30, 2016, 06:41:23 AM

Repost that on your main, why dont you?

They probably have so many accounts that figuring out which one is the 'main' is a tough process. Tongue

whothefuckareyou

jr. member

Activity: 49

Merit: 10

Quote from: izanagi narukami on November 30, 2016, 06:39:49 AM

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 06:29:53 AM

Lauda is not fit to be moderator and should not be in default trust. It is a conflict of interest. He is using his power as moderator and his default trust power to bully and other signature campaign poster and manager. All his actions is to promote ACE and to monopolize and pacifies other signature campaigns.

Here's the situation :

People especially who exist from 2011s on this forum , yelling about bct post quality post ( for example : Danny Hamilton )
so for the solution, staff forum make their own initiative so fight spam and improved post quality forum so Lauda and team build their SMAS and ACE project

In one side : Lauda team consider as monopolize all campaign
but in other side : Forum post quality get better ( compare if ACE and SMAS never exist )

I'm an advocate of free market system. I'm in favor of fighting spam but not this way. Lauda is not doing this to fight spam only idiots would believe that. Lauda is only doing this to earn more bitcoins from monopolizing signature campaigns.

ACE - Only benefits Lauda and his buddies and alts.

SMAS - It is only purpose is to bully/force advertisers and to use SMAS members as managers.

Decoded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1030

give me your cryptos

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 06:29:53 AM

Lauda is not fit to be moderator and should not be in default trust. It is a conflict of interest. He is using his power as moderator and his default trust power to bully and other signature campaign posters and managers. He is forcing advertisers to use ACE. All his actions is to promote ACE and to monopolize and pacifies other signature campaigns. This guy is corrupt and should not hold this positions.

Repost that on your main, why dont you?

There's no conflict of interest. Lauda is acting upon the better interests of the community, disregarding all the low quality signature spammers that you so dutifully support.

Lauda promoting ACE does not mean anything. If theymos were to wear a bitmixer signature, would you say this whole forum is run by bitmixer employees? Again, Lauda is supporting the obliteration of spam.

Please don't tell me that you think moderator intervention is bad... Bitmixer is much better off with Lauda managing it, just like YoBit is with Hilariousandco doing the same.

izanagi narukami

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1028

Quote from: whothefuckareyou on November 30, 2016, 06:29:53 AM

Lauda is not fit to be moderator and should not be in default trust. It is a conflict of interest. He is using his power as moderator and his default trust power to bully and other signature campaign poster and manager. All his actions is to promote ACE and to monopolize and pacifies other signature campaigns.

Here's the situation :

People especially who exist from 2011s on this forum , yelling about bct post quality post ( for example : Danny Hamilton )
so for the solution, staff forum make their own initiative so fight spam and improved post quality forum so Lauda and team build their SMAS and ACE project

In one side : Lauda team consider as monopolize all campaign
but in other side : Forum post quality get better ( compare if ACE and SMAS never exist )

whothefuckareyou

jr. member

Activity: 49

Merit: 10

Lauda is not fit to be moderator and should not be in default trust. It is a conflict of interest. He is using his power as moderator and his default trust power to bully other signature campaign posters and managers. He is forcing advertisers to use ACE. All his actions is to promote ACE and to monopolize and pacifies other signature campaigns. This guy is corrupt and should not hold this positions.

minifrij

legendary

Activity: 2324

Merit: 1267

In Memory of Zepher

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:52:37 AM

There is not a single DAX 30 or a FTSE 100 company that will let someone "press a few buttons" regarding a transaction/decision involving themselves.

The majority of the time, the person will not even participate in the discussion regarding this kind of discussion, therefore the mere suggestion that a thread about you should be moderated is inappropriate.

There is no solid evidence that the alleged discussion took place before to the moderation action.

Remind me why this is relevant whatsoever? All Lauda did was move the topic to where it belonged, something that would have been done by another moderator had Lauda not. They didn't remove or censor the topic, not even obstructing it from view (as there is a trail that can be followed to find it's new location).
Your obvious bias is making you look like nothing other than a school kid, and no amount of irrelevant comparisons or pseudo-knowledge will change that.

gorgon666

member

Activity: 92

Merit: 10

Quote from: Lauda on November 30, 2016, 04:17:21 AM

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:15:23 AM

Chat logs are worthless and can be doctored.

Yes, I'm most certainly trying to falsify what Mitchell said. Roll Eyes

Quote from: gorgon666 on November 30, 2016, 04:15:23 AM

You did handle the thread yourself regardless of if "DeepSpace" told you it belongs somewhere else.

Point being? The only difference is who pressed a few buttons, the decision was by a neutral moderator. Grasping at straws again Quickseller.

There is not a single DAX 30 or a FTSE 100 company that will let someone "press a few buttons" regarding a transaction/decision involving themselves.

The majority of the time, the person will not even participate in the discussion regarding this kind of discussion, therefore the mere suggestion that a thread about you should be moderated is inappropriate.

There is no solid evidence that the alleged discussion took place before to the moderation action.

Topic: Q: Should Lauda *really* be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no - page 5. (Read 43345 times)

Topic: Q: Should Lauda really be a moderator of bitcointalk A: no - page 5. (Read 43345 times)