Topic: Re: BitcoinGirl.Club: How a condescending attitude equates to trust exclusion (Read 1349 times)

Let's move the discussion to a new topic with the investigation I was conducting for the last a week. It needs the new topic to be visible for many and to find the original truth. Please read the topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/do-you-know-enough-of-what-you-have-been-told-5495227

I am locking the thread now.

Buddy, is this not what you're talking about by any chance?

The OP must be running out of people to Troll - I'm the latest to have been spammed with their rambling blue highlighted navel gazing.

As to one of your questions concerning icopress contacting me - not since I blocked them quite a while ago when they tried to manipulate the DT rankings.

Yes, I know about that and Jolly only comes to discussions where many members support him, or come to advise someone, without realizing the mistake he made.

I've tried to argue with him several times, but he always avoids it and doesn't want to admit his mistake. Members who don't want to admit their mistakes are the worst, that's what I know

I have tried to argue with him in a healthy way, but he doesn't respond well so I need to use harsher methods and make many people aware that Jolly is too selfish. I acknowledge you and your wise views, you are the best one in this forum

Sometimes users know that it's a waste of time to respond to certain people.  There are some that like to engage in the arguments and those that don't want to argue unless they are arguing a point.

I wouldn't waste my time arguing on deaf ears in most cases.

Very funny... 

Do you think the response is important? So you are giving OP advice on how to respond to yahoo62278? Then what do you do? you created a locked thread, you don't dare to argue with me in the thread I created. You always talk nonsense and are an arrogant braggart

People are free to not take a person's advice no matter if the advice is good or bad. I'm ok with it.

Well, unfortunately your advice fell on deaf ears and it did not even warrant a response by the OP. That degree of arrogance is precisely what members see on a regular basis and it alienates them. Sometimes you honestly wonder why bother posting with care and consideration with advice when those that you reach out to simply ignore you.

From BitcoinGirl.Club to "this" member, interesting 😂



I hope the members who know me closely can now keep this question about "who is the owner of the account" in the side bench, I am the same f**ker who is f**king all these bitches for years LOL 😘

/*edited*/

Interesting little observation.
There was some issue with his account some time ago, it was claimed to be hacked or something, and I see a lot of password changes.
He didn't reply anything to your post but it would be interesting to hear why this member changed his posting habits, if he is in fact the same owner.

PS
Without revealing anything, I can only say that BitcoinGirl.Club contacted me few days ago and asked if I received any message from icopress telling me to distrust him.
He also showed me some half edited and censored screenshots that I never asked to see, so I can't say what really happened.
One thing I know for sure, this forum is full of snitches  

Lol 

Don't you have any good discussion material? you always repeat the same thing. Similarity? Come on, show me where my posts are located that are similar to komisariatku

But I'm sure you can't prove it, and of course this is your 34th bullshit. I challenge you to find my posting habits the same as komisariatku. just prove it, if you can't then you are just a braggart.

If you thought I would abandon my account because I couldn't join the campaign, you were wrong. I will always be here, watching your ridiculous behavior 

@BitcoinGirl.Club you cannot prove that icopress sent a mass pm to participants and asked them to ~ you, so trying to argue that would be pointless really. I cannot say he did or didn't, have always had pretty fair dealings with icopress.

Everyone has shocked me that is involved by the fact that not one has given a negative, so at least the trust system isn't being abused. As you know, anyone can distrust you for any reason. It's not illegal. Some of your thoughts on the whole situation may or may not be correct, but without concrete proof, you're kinda pissin up a rope. You're free to continue this and see who's mind you can change, but at the moment it would seem you are wasting your breathe. I would consider locking it and revisiting if you come across proof of your feelings.

His was a lost cause a long time ago. Do not waste your time engaging with him (and especially not by advising him).

This is the 44th post in this thread but an interesting statistic is that 9 posts in this thread (equates to over 20%) were made by the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming puppeteer. Those are very interesting statistics.

I see some similarities between the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming troll and another account that ended up getting multiple tags therefore ended by giving up on that account. I hope the sooner the other accounts operated by the komisariatku/PytagoraZ account farming troll are accidentally revealed by him and receive tags as a response, the better.

^ You’re reaching.

Who thinks Jambler is less trustworthy because they could be pretending not to be a mixer, while they could actually be, just to avoid a forum ban? That makes no sense to me.

Let’s say: the USA is going after VPNs, we all like them, one suddenly rewords his website to pretend they are not a VPN so they keep working. Suddenly we think the VPN provider is bad? You are acting like a fed.

Scamming? Reputation damage.
(Supposedly) Avoiding a single man’s decision to ban mixers? Don’t care.

I think it needs a little clear explanation. Let us consider each feedback individually for each accounts.

First icopress.
From January 1st the idea are "Mixers are ban".  But to avoid the ban, the team was giving all their focus to call it a software provider [not a software provider at all though, I noticed somewhere they even changed some texts of their website to make it look like a software provider]. All mixing process were done in their end but because they did not have a front-end under their own domain they were calling the product as not a mixer.

Before https://web.archive.org/web/20230331054656/https://[banned mixer]/

Now

Before https://web.archive.org/web/20230331054656/https://[banned mixer]/


Now


Let's be more close.
Snap on November 15th 2023: https://web.archive.org/web/20231115115459/https://[banned mixer]/ [replace "[banned mixer]" use "JamblerDOTio" DOT=. in the URL]
Theymos posted Mixers will be banned from January 1st.
Snap on December 7th 2023: https://web.archive.org/web/20231207030249/https://[banned mixer]/

On the other hand can we accept it with a guarantee that these front-ends, those they are calling partners are not from the Jambler team itself? Jambler team itself can easily finance the marketing and hosting expense. All it needs to buy a domain, install the PHP code and create a different name to launch front-ends to accept coin under different domain names. The core is always same, pointing to one central database. What confused me a lot that out of 5% plus 0.0007 BTC (network fee), Jambler is taking 3% plus 0.0007 BTC (network fee), the partner was taking even less than 2%. Who in their logical business mind will spend so much money to give majority share to the API provider and is going to keep less for themselves? Visit clickbank, the biggest affiliate network, you will find referral commissions are even 90%, the product provider is taking even less than 10%. It's because overtime from many referrals the product owner eventually make the bigger money than the referrals

By doing all these Jambler team wanted to avoid the rule that was implemented to avoid mixers on the forum. A scam does not always have to be with the cash/digital money. When someone have an idea and someone else stole it then this stealing is also a scam. Jambler stole "Mixers ban" from the forum and continued their marketing in the forum for three more months.

Given that I am also in the campaign managed by icopress, so maybe I can be a part of this drama, I also confirm that I have not received any similar request through PM to exclude someone from the trust list.
What I can confirm is that I received a PM from him earlier, but it was exclusively related to the transfer to another campaign when the previous one (Wasabi) ended. I saw it as taking care of campaigns and participants, which is certainly respectable

You need to change to UID to identify a user.  Some idiots like Tradefortress used to play around with usernames to break BPIP.

Sorry about that. A username change messed up my script, and needed manual attention. But it's Kingsday here, so we had plans with the kids. I wiped the "damaged" directory to prevent people from linking to it.

A new update is running now, this link should work when it's done: loyce.club/trust/2024-04-27_Sat_16.29h/662330.html.
Update: it's done.

That's the thing: theymos' trust data dumps (unlike his Merit data dumps) use usernames.

we all value privacy and most of us are against banning mixers, but is the reason for not trusting @BitcoinGirl.Club because he made it clear that @jambler was a mixer? Or did I miss something?

I wanted to check latest updated list ----> http://loyce.club/trust/2024-04-27_Sat_05.07h/662330.html  but I get (sorry, that page is missing.) @LoyceV you need to make some updates.

@BitcoinGirl.Club you need to check the trust list of accounts that distrusted you. If they have a changing distrust list, there is no need to ask them, and if it is them first-timer, it is better to ask them in PM. Depending on their reasons, you can decide to lock topic or not.

Briefly:

 - I still trust @BitcoinGirl.Club, and if there is a reason not to trust him, it is best to list it below so I can remove him.
 - You should not distrust @BitcoinGirl.Club because he made it clear that jambler is a mixer.
 - I still trust @icopress and I do not see that he forced others to distrust @BitcoinGirl.Club.
 - I didn't like the way @icopress explained^[1] what happened.

[1]

Were you around before and when the hack happened?  

Feels like it was a long time ago. I remember the saga.