Topic: Ree @hacker1001101001 ICO bump account (Read 5749 times)

Hacker's last response in this topic was 3 months ago, I don't think users should bump this topic(irony) any more as he obviously doesn't want to reply. Anyone who wants to read topic can easily click on flag or one of the references he has on his trust page and make their own conclusion.

I demand hacker to obey to the two Legendary members trying for so much time to summon him and to honor with his presence here! If until recently there were "just" a Legendary member and a Hero trying to summon him, now there are two Legendaries, taking into account JollyGood's recent rank up.

As a consequence, dear hacker, we all know you are shy like a virgin girl, but leave that behind and get over here! Brace yourself and face the questions! Be a man!

* much deserved bump *

Still no sign of multi-scammer foul-mouthed profanity laden hacker1001101001 to post here and explain his behaviour?

This is true, it is confirmed hacker1001101001 is an absolute waste of space who gets in with any unsavoury character just to attack DT members.

He likes to dish it out so serving him some of his own medicine is fair imo.

So how much longer do you think you guys will need for your homoerotic forum cop wankfest before you guys are finished?

He seems to post in other threads but skips past this one because he has been exposed as a multi-scammer and compulsive liar.

Did you manage to convince him to start posting here and explaining why he lied throughout the period he was given the benefit of the doubt by some users?  

He misses you guys, but he's just too shy.


I keep telling him to come back to his party, but he is just like a delicate, shy girl.



I'll try more to convince him...

Just had a good look into this, nice work boys.

Flag supported.

Thank you for the reminder 

I see the main protagonist hacker1001101001 is still actively avoiding answering the allegations put to him so elegantly with evidence.

I have had some attention-seekers follow me around trying to deflect attention away from their own behaviour which was intended to make this forum a divisive environment but in the end people can see them for what they are.

Maybe most conflicts here do stem from revenge, there are lots of groups and cliques that gang up on users to get them off DT and so on and they have made it part of their policy to do it.

^^ Quick reminder from the OP:

Nobody will create a topic to search for your past, unless they want revenge. Most conflicts on this forum stem from revenge, I mean for people who never participated in investigation, but later, they opened an investigation about someone, meaning are they are seeking revenge. I think many people have tried investigating you, but after that, there's nothing to denounce 

I have to agree, if somebody wanted to create a thread about me exploring my alleged "pay me for bumping your ICO thread" career or if somebody wanted to create a thread exploring all of my alleged multi-accounts that were possibly created for a variety of reasons but all related to me pocketing money by spreading propaganda then I would not have no real cause for objection.

Thanks to excellent investigative work by marlboroza more information regarding highly questionable behaviour by hacker1001101001 seems to surface from time to time.

Bump.


References please. 44 hours & counting.

---

True story. >100 characters ✔️
 

---

And if marlboroza wants to create a thread exploring my ICO bumping career and my spamming/scamming alts - more power to him. I won't consider that as retaliation.

In the first quote you referenced, you replied discussing rules for driving a fictional clown car and whether you could be the driver 


It was funny don't get me wrong, but also as spammy as you get.

I don't know if it can be called "stalking" but hacker10101010101010101010101 does tend to insert himself into trust-related discussions for no other reason than to attack his accusers, often without any particular relevance to the discussion at hand. OTOH this "witch hunt" seems to be contained mostly in one thread. I don't think it's retaliation. His illiterate ramblings aren't something that anybody would bother to "retaliate" for, it just confirms that he's still a spammer at heart.

Could you provide proof of this claim please? I don't mean references from 500 days ago, but in the present, ideally in the past week or month. Either that, or you mean "You were just another ICO bump account". Accuracy is key here, otherwise it comes across as unnecessary slander. I apologize if your English isn't up to scratch with past and present tenses, but I very much believe it is.

Just to clarify, I'm not interested in some rebuttal on "everything hacker1001101001 did the past [insert references here]. I read the accusations as well as the apologies, I verified a signature, I've seen (all) of the negative feedback and the flag. I understand that you want to get to the bottom of this, but it seems that in all likelihood you won't, especially if the witch-hunt appears never-ending*. He's at -4 DT negs, there is an active flag against his account. If he is "stalking" (strong word!) his accusers in other threads as a form of retaliation against his accusers, it doesn't make it right to retaliate in return. It's not a good luck either imo.

No-one is doubting he did shady shit in the past (even him), and for that you're more than welcome to distrust him, even neg him if that's how you feel, but turning this into a 40 page topic* regarding someone's reputation really isn't necessary imo. For reference sake before you go investigating:, I don't trust hacker, or distrust them, I simply don't believe "anyone dealing with hacker1001101001 is at a high risk of losing money". If this was a flag from when they were engaging in these well-referenced accusations, then I wouldn't be opposing such a flag. If there was a flag that claimed "anyone dealing with hacker1001101001 was at a high risk of losing money", I'd also probably support it. It's easy for people to suddenly "change" for their own benefit when they are confronted on the crap they've done, it's a lot different than when someone changes before being called out imo.

Just my two cents, don't take it personally  
TL:DR: Nothing relevant to see here.

---

This was a dozen pages ago.


This was page 14.