Topic: Ree @hacker1001101001 ICO bump account - page 6. (Read 5749 times)

You may have misread me.  I had not said or even meant to imply anything about additional possible research from me causing any kind of possible conflicts.  Largely what I had attempted to say was that at the time that I posted and I had sent whatever merits in the thread that I had sent.  I had made those comments and sent those smerits based upon enough information to support whatever claims that I was making within my posts, and I also had enough justification to send smerits.  There was no reason for me to do any further research into the matter or even to justify why I had either made my posts or sent smerits.

You, dear sir, are bringing up new topics, and you, dear sir, have the burden to bring facts and/or logic to your claims rather than attempting to put burdens on me to either research or to justify my behaviors that are well within my discretion and not even any bias or favor or anything beyond your merely continuing to make baseless accusations of such.  

Like I tried to say, it is going to be difficult to become friends, if you are continuing to accuse me of bad motives when I am bending over backwards attempting to explain to you that I don't want to go out there and read a bunch of stuff that is NOT of any interest to me merely because you want to assign such to me and to suggest that I have some kind of obligation to research your links beyond my merely reading the titles of the links (just in case they might have seemed to have been relevant to some topic or even something that I might have been interested in, and those links were neither, at least not on the face of it.. .so you need a bit more than a link and some meandering into irrelevance to cause me to consider that the links might either be relevant or interesting).



I am not avoiding evidence.  I made a comment in this thread, and I sent an smerit to lauda based on one of her earlier posts in the thread, and then thereafter, I have been responding to other posts in the thread such as responding to khaled0111 and to hacker, and thereafter you chimed in to tell me something about my posts not being sufficiently justified, and I believe that they were sufficiently justified already. No further homework or research needed in order to support the points that I made or the smerit(s) that I sent.

I have not edited any of those posts, so if you believe that I either said something that was insufficiently researched or that my merit was somehow not reasonably within my discretion, then please point out some more specific aspect rather than giving me an assignment and then asserting that I had some kind of obligation to do your assignment.  That makes hardly any sense to me, and causes me to tentatively conclude that you are not even trying one iota to be friends.  You said that you do not want to make enemies, either, and I am trying to give you some benefit of the doubt, but you surely are not helping me with your difficult to follow logic about some supposed obligations that you believe that I have.



I don't recall ever advocating any action in regards to hacker.  It seems that initially I was merely responding to comments that khaled0111 made, and then after hacker chimed in, then I said that I had recalled that hacker had attempted to bully me on one occasion, and then you jumped in to proclaim that i was bias.  Even with all of that, I was not really advocating anything in regards to hacker, except I suppose maybe when you suggested that "we" help out hacker, I suggested that we figure out if we can agree to a way that hacker can help himself. I don't recall going much further down the path of advocating anything against hacker.. at least, not based on anything that we have covered so far.



I was asking.  I don't want to research about any of that either. I was preferring to just hear it from you instead of investigating into the matter.  I suppose if I looked into the matter, I probably could find some accusations, but what do I care?  I was just trying to figure out if maybe there might be some space that we might have some mutual interests, and surely, I am not really going to be able to become buddy buddy with you if it seems that you are hiding possibly important and material information from me...  but whatever, that is fine.. if you do not want to share, then that is your choice. I suppose at some point, I will either come across further information or maybe someone will tell me, but it not really top of my concern at the moment.

I mean, you are not even responding to various proposals that I made, either, so I mean we really don't be seeming to be jiving in a lot of ways, so I don't really need to hear more about your various alts, unless you think that it might be helpful in some kind of way, given the kinds of mini-disasters that we seem to have already been having about seemingly more trivial things.  I mean, if we cannot resolve some trivial things, then why should we even attempt to address more complicated matters?  My tentative thinking.



I try... when I am able to.



I agree that it does sometimes help to get down to the nitty gritty and to clarify which parts are being responded to.. which parts are agreed to and which parts are disputed, to the extent that might be helpful, and also when a lot of sub-ideas seem to be flying around.

Hahaha

yeah.. I am thinking that bonesjones might be incapable of trying to make a friend.  I was hoping that he could be one of my first forum friends, even though he asserts suspicions that I have already made other forum friends.  Bonesjones might have trust issues.  Perhaps?



I am purposefully NOT going to even attempt to respond to such "rhetorical question" beside just noting that I am not responding.   


I really like the thought of that assuming arguendo part and attempting to rank such levels of evil on a world-wide scale including living and presumably dead people in such competition.

But, the second part of that proposition is that you are correct, you presumptively evil bastard.  Your admitted (even if merely hypothetical, but I know that you are really admitting something deep down on the inside) level of evil is not even relevant to this thread.  You could be like the worst level of evil, and hacker might be evil like a mouse and even the most minimal level of evil, but the thread is not talking about either you or even that other pointed out evil cat one.  It is about little intsie winsie teenie weenie evil of hacker, to the extent any evil exists in hacker.... I am not even going to presume any evil in hacker personally, even if he may have been mean to me one time, but the topic of this thread happens to be about hacker and perhaps whether any evil actually exists therein.




Repeating the same point in another way.  Exactly.



Sure.  And, I must apologize for participating in such diversions, too.  I was just attempting to figure out if there may have been some round-about way to get some meaningful dialogue going with bonesjones.  Might have been greedy of me.


I suppose that largely I agree, yet any of us sometimes might prefer to dance around certain topics, anyhow.  I mean we do not necessarily need to get to the truth on every single topic, and sometimes if you just "call bullshit" that is really not very nice, and may cause someone to become hostile to your sending them a message, but if you dance around the topic by sending a meme or something, they still understand the point, and may even kind of save face, too.  I don't necessarily get any pleasures by insulting someone if it is not really productive, but sometimes some great exaggeration, even when you don't mean it, can be productive, too.... and usually more effective if you don't use it all of the time.  Sometimes members make fun of me, because of certain patterns of saying things, and so then, that might be a red flag that I have some annoying patterns of speech that I might want to try to correct because the pattern is taking away from the intended message.


I have been lectured pretty harshly about spending too much time in the WO thread, and I am not going to concede on that point, but mostly, I am able to focus more on bitcoin in that thread, even though we have been spending quite a bit of time on the virus lately, too, which is understandable and on a lot of minds of posters in recent times.. and some of the posters do try to bring it back to bitcoin, too.... and even though so much goes on in bitcoin, sometimes, we like a little distraction from the topic, even sometimes we might be thinking that the BTC price is not moving enough or it is moving in the wrong direction, so yeah, it is NOT necessarily bad to have some other topics from time to time.

It appears the fake scam hunter jollygood has reared its duplicitous head.

How can providing context for malborozas red trust and your own red trust of hacker0101000101
be misdirection?

Are you claiming punishment of possible ico bumping should just be isolated from all context that you and malboroza set?

As opposed to the derailing of just random false accusations of trolling people spam on my threads?

You and marlboroza have given hacker red tags? I believe you want to prevent any context because it will reveal you are pushing double standards.

I see that people here are classed as on topic discussing whether or not hacker010010 should be added to a persons trust list??
Again to answer that we need context do we not??
I mean i am trying to make sense of what you and others are claiming? Hacker00101 should not be on a trust list for possible ico bumping you say? In the context of you guys including confirmed scammers??

Is this what you are saying yes or no?

Scammers you include
Possible ico bumpers exclude

Scamming you ignore or try to defend
Possible ico bumping you make threads and publicly denigrate?

Just trying to make a summary of the thread so far?

"Misdirection" is a word that comes to mind. There is a certain group full of attention-seeking users that just cannot help themselves but create all sorts of dramas without addressing the core issues. They prefer posting about various non-related things instead of the specific reasons the threads were created for and will ignore any evidence presented just for the sake of their misdirection ploy.

Jayjuangee

This was an excellent reply. It would seem that you are speaking the truth here
You have correctly noted that digging deeply into those links would indeed perhaps cause conflict with others.
I do not believe any member should avoid reviewing evidence scamming but since you are not advocating any action with regard hacker, then there is no need of context for that action in order to ensure fair and consistent treatment.
The only real flaw in the post was the assumption that you know which alts are mine if any.
Genuinely though thank you for the mature reply. I do believe your posts are of value
When someone addresses each individual part of a post a clear and valuable debate can take place.


Suchmoon

Again with the lies and false accusations of trolling
Bring the specific examples of the false and incorrect information i have presented
I see you ran away from the challenges i set you to stand behind your claims
Repeatedly labelling irrefutable evidence of your friends scamming as trolling is scammer shielding and you will be held accountable

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/suchmoon-claims-you-should-ban-members-for-presenting-evidence-of-scamming-tr-5238678

Nullius

Lol well this coward is the most pathetic here.
Tries to defend and shield confirmed scammers then when I challenge him to work through his faux defence with m step by step he runs away to his own thread to present a bunch of rambling assumptions that are irrelevant and he can not even prove and bans me from replying on that thread lol
I explain why his " defence " is clearly bogus and he just pretends not to see it and just keeps presenting his nonsense as if it really does present  a rebuttal

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nullius-defending-the-scammer-lauda-and-nutildah-terrified-of-open-debate-with-5238490

Now he asks why is setting context on topic for the discussion of hacker by these same scammers?

Well it is quite clear. If you are setting punishment for hacker then it must be given context to be fair and consistent

Starting threads poking around and making thread titles like this is clearly punishment as are the red tags he has been given? Where are laudas tags? Tmans tags? Nutildahs tags?
Why is malboroza not making threads about them?

Why are these scammers and scammer supporters always found colluding together targeting those that speak out against them even one time?

I see bullying mentioned. These people are the bullies. I simply wish to see all members treated equally.
There is a pattern that anytime someone says something they dont like a character attack takes place.
Sure if they have done something wrong they can be punished but not by scammers or scammer supporters
Everyones punishment should fit the crime and be consistent

I'm never said I am trying to make friends. I will be civil and reasonable with those that are civil and reasonable with me.
Fair is fair. A concept many here are yet to grasp.

Doesn't make any sense, other than being a massive projection on your part seeing how you completely ignore any facts and just relentlessly attack the messenger.


I never said it does. I said the information may help you. You're just too stubborn to make use of it.

How did a thread about wrongdoing by the self-styled “hacker” who fails basic coding shibboleths become a discussion of whether JayJuanGee has adequately considered the evils of Lauda and nullius.  ← Rhetorical question intentionally concluded with a full stop.


More to the point, even assuming arguendo that I am the most “evil” person on this forum in the world (and Lauda is #3—sorry, kitty, Hitler is still #2; try harder), what has this to do with the bad doings by hacker1001101001 that are evidenced in this thread?

Objectively, my and Lauda’s allegedly most-evil doings would not excuse “hacker’s” allegedly “possibly far lesser evils”.

Of course, such diversionary tactics are just that.

---

Some people dislike reading; others, to the contrary.  “Unnecessarily confrontational” is another way of saying, “no bullshit”.  At least if you disagree with me, I know that you will explain substantively and without beating around the bush, instead of just tossing off insults, snarky one-liners, or animated GIFs.


I miss talking about Bitcoin.

---

That is completely off-topic here, so I will only provided a cross-reference to “bonesjonesreturns” claims that “Nobody has dared try to refute the evidence”, with a very short excerpt:


Not taking it up in a thread about hacker1001101001.

---

Agreed.

Even though he has logged in multiple times (even as recently as an hour or so ago), hacker1001101001 has not posted here and allowed his guild team buddies to argue the case on his behalf  

A special mention to JayJuanGee... you have the patience of a saint. I mean the way you meticulously answer the trolls with point-by-point clarity is very impressive even though you probably know you are engaging with trolls and attention seeking deluded individuals/groups.... your way to engage them and manage them is without doubt impressive. No matter how much you address them they have their own ulterior motives and sometimes hidden sometimes overt agendas but you still present your points and answers in the most professional manner imaginable.

From criticism. Any time anyone criticizes the clown lord, the same group of Bozos always mobilize to attack the one making the criticism. It happens over and over and over again. This is designed to send a message that anyone openly critical of them will pay a price, and silence that criticism. They aren't on DT anymore? I wonder why that is? Could it be because of this exact behavior pattern I just outlined? How the fuck does what happens to hacker1001101001 effect me whatsoever? I am just fed up with you chumps and your little trust abuse cartel.




Because I decided to Nutilduuuuh. Why did you try to sell your account? Oh right, only I owe you answers to you, because you are part of The Grand Clown Inquisition Council, but that doesn't work the other way now does it? Fuck you and your demands. I don't owe you shit. Yes, string together some more assumptions Ms. Cleo. Keep trying until something sticks.

Hey we agree on something.  I cannot believe that I might get to become progressively greater and greater buddies with someone who hardly anyone else seems to like.



uh oh?  I am starting to feel manipulated, already.... This is not going as well as the first sentence seemed to have had suggested.


I don't feel qualified to rate the matter without doing some homework.  Are you suggesting that I need to do some homework?

I have noticed through my years in various forums that troll shills tend to assign projects to me...

But, o.k... let me attempt to give you some benefit of the doubt here.  You are not trying to assign me any homework, you just would like me to assess based on the homework that i have already done, perhaps?

Still seems like work.  This is a friendship that is requiring me to do work that I do not want to do.

Hey, bonesjones, good buddy (potentially).  Didn't I say that I was mostly interested in talking about bitcoin related matters?

You want me to get involved in some topic that is of very little interest to me?

Let me just say, everyone should be treated fairly including hacker.  Feel better bonesjones?



Well, I was NOT planning on doing anything other than what I had already done.  Are you asking me to get involved in some kind of way beyond whatever I already have done?  Is there something that I need to consider?  Are you suggesting that I need to read through some parts of this thread that I may or may not have read and/or to refresh my recollection about something?  I don't usually like getting assignments unless it is a topic that interests me.  I am currently trying to juggle a few things in my life, so maybe you need to direct me at something specifically that you believe that I need to look at, good buddy (potentially).


I clicked on those two threads and I saw the subject matter.  One is about your assessment of something related to Lauda and the other is about your assessment of something related to Nullius.  I am not really interested in homework.  Geez.  This friendship is seeming to digress into something seeming quite one-sided.  You want me to do a quite a bit of work, and we are just barely getting to know each other.. Fuck.  I thought that we were going to possibly be buddies.    Yeah, of course, I had a few reservations, including the fact that I barely have gotten to know you, including my questioning about your various other accounts and how you purportedly already know so much about me, but then you want to assign me homework for me instead of attempting to get to know each other MOAR better.

 



I would have to do homework to engage in ratings of these matters.  I am not even interested in the subject matter.. well at least not superficially.


I don't have double standards.  I know a lot of people who do not give me assignments, and it makes me feel much MOAR better to NOT have matters imposed on me.  Didn't I already disclose to you that one of my main interests in the forum is related to bitcoin, and you want me to do other things.  Also, corona virus and some other personal topics are interesting to me, currently, but you want me to jump into some topic that is not interesting to me, at the moment in terms of my current happenings and thoughts.. including merely just attempting to figure out if we have any mutual interests.. besides a superficial one that everyone should be treated fairly, including hacker.


Yeah... I wasn't aware that I was either pushing double standards or favourites.  I just thought that i was randomly following what was interesting to me, but it ends up skewing towards my feelings and my interests at the moment. For example, I am getting a bit hungry right now, and I keep thinking about if I should have a snack or if I should keep responding to you.  I also have some papers on my desk that I need to sort, so I am kind of favoring  putting them in order rather than reading some assignments from someone who I barely even know beyond our couple of posts, already.  This possible friendship is not going how I was thinking that it might go, and so yeah I did not realize how I prefer to kind of get to know peeps before taking orders (assignments) from them...


It seems that you have misjudged me, if you want to start out our budding friendship through homework.  Maybe there is some other mutual interest topic that does not require me to do homework?


I feel that I am not going to be very popular in my allowing you to drag me down these seemingly increasing off topic lines of inquiry, including that I am responding to your questions about my supposed clouded judgement, and seems that we are getting way far afield.  

So in essence, it seems that I may be sacrificing some of my purported and potential popularity just for interacting with you about these nonsensical views regarding what motivates me and if my views and feelings might cause me to inadvertently compound a 2 tiered system.

Fuck what everyone else thinks.. I am trying to answer your questions... and fuck all you guys (and gal) who think that bonesjones is not worth responding..  I am going to sacrifice some of my potential present and future popularity to entertain him, and give him the benefit of the doubt that he is not devolving into nonsense.


I agree.


Thanks.  I am refusing to do homework that is assigned by you until we become better buddies by getting to know each other a bit better.



Yeah.. sure.  Some members, including you, are not going to like me very much because they might believe that I should do some more homework.  And, I suppose that I am feeling like a bit of a jerk because I don't want to do any homework, especially the way that the homework seems to be getting imposed upon me... so yeah, that might not be fair, exactly that I had come into this dialogue considering that I had already done enough homework in terms of my previous posts and my previous decisions to give merits.. etc etc.. .  I believe that I am fair by trying to read your post and respond, but members are not going to like my response, including you, so what am I to do?  you surely are coming off as a bit over bearing and even putting me in a pickle.., and we are just getting to know each other.  But, hey,..  maybe I should stop complaining and attempt to work with you some more, even though this surely, is not going very well, so far.  Sucks to be me, currently.



I did not believe that I was engaging in any compare contrast of hacker versus lauda versus nullius, but you believe that before I had posted I should have been engaging in some kind of compare and contrast of the behaviors of these three members?  Pretty high standards, and I did not know that I had not been sufficiently prepared to post or to send merits or whatever I had done earlier in the thread.  



I thought that I already said that I did not believe that I had any burdens to provide information.  I said that in my earlier post.  I mean I even had asked some questions about how you know me so much, but you did not even respond to some of my inquiries, instead you launched yourself into giving me assignments.    We don't seem to be getting anywhere, so far... beyond a couple of superficial agreements... otherwise, you just keep assuming that I need to study certain topics... and make some kind of compare and contrast of the actions of different members in a way more than I already have done.  Seems a bit burdensome to me.


You are saying that Lauda and Nullius have done equally or greater evils than hacker, but did I accuse hacker of doing an evil in this thread?  Yeah, he interacted with me, and I posted a response. I also liked one of Lauda's posts.  What are you saying, exactly bonesjones? What judgements have I been making in regards to hacker that I should be making regarding Lauda and Nullius?   I am just having troubles with whatever connections that you are making regarding how I may have done some unfair actions, and then I am supposed to justify my behaviors?



Well I thought that we were working on being friends.. so please don't go in the opposite direction.  Let's try the friend part first.


We might need to start over, because so far the friend part is not working out very well.



You are saying that in order for us to try to become friends, then I need to study into Lauda and Nullius first?  I am getting more lost regarding what you are expecting of me.



Oh?  You are going to tell me about your alts?  None of your alts are popular, so far?   By the way, I actually did not realize that I was striving towards popularity, but I was attempting to concede that the longer that any member has an account and the more than the member interacts with other members, then the account is likely to become more popular.  I still do not believe that I was striving to be popular, even if I may have become more popular with the passage of time.



O.k.  If you suggest that there are only two possible outcomes, then I suppose that you have reached your conclusion, right?

Are we done then?

Are we breaking up, before we even got started in our friendship attempt?



That's true.  I think maturity is a good thing, and having a sense of humor is good too.  And, not being a bully is good too.

But, I am still not sure if we are getting very far in our discussion, and lots of peeps are probably going to get pissed off at me for trying to respond to you, when they are going to conclude that we could never be friends, and that I am entertaining you dragging this aspect of our conversation into way too much off-topicness. However, I keep trying to see if we can work something out, even though the whole discussion seems to be devolving into nonsense.


This might be another area of agreement that we might be able to explore - even though I am not sure how far it is going to get us, but at least there seems to be some additional possible shared interest....




I have found that there is likely a decent amount of subjective assessments concerning whether content might be more or less valuable.



I agree that frequently there can be room for improvement, but still discretion in that too.  Many times, I have found friendships that strive towards accepting me for who I am to be more beneficial than ones that seem to be trying to change some aspect of me, but if there are other areas in which there is a mutual benefit, then sometimes flaws can be overlooked.  I do agree that sometimes people do get a bit of a tendency that they want to change things that might either be beyond their control or NOT very likely to be easily changed.




I am surely behind my words, yet I never said that I was striving for anyone's treatment to be changed, including hackers.  I said that hacker deserves fair treatment, which has implications that everyone deserves fair treatment.  I doubt that I was saying much more than that.  



Hopefully, I don't have to analyze you.  I was preferring that we just try to find things that we have in common and build our friendship from there.  Of course, along the way of building our friendship, I may incidentally find some things that I might be able to help you with or to analyze you, but I am not really interested in analyzing you, unless there is some topic that you post about that is interesting to me.  Do you have any bitcoin-related posts that might be interesting to me, for starts?  There's gotta be something to get us going a little better than we have been able to accomplish so far in our short (only two back and forth posts) relationship.



Sure... truths, fair treatment for all members and leaving it for later.  I agree on all of those points.


Why can't hacker sort himself out?  

I come from a kind of self-help background.  Of course, sometimes people need a hand in getting their shit in order or figuring out if there are things that they can do to better help themselves, but many times people need to make sure that their shit is in order and even to figure out if they need to change or if there are ways that they can fix or tweak their shit.  

You really believe, bonesjones, that there is something that you and I need to do, and we will find some commonality in some kind of approach that might work with "getting hacker sorted out"?

I am thinking that a good way to frame the matter would be to ask how can we figure out a way (or ways) for hacker to better help himself?  I don't want to spend too much time on this, and surely I would not want to enable some problematic issue.  I have hardly any clue about the whole underlying background, including not knowing hardly shit about hacker either, except for some interactions with him in which I recall that he was trying to bully me.. but hey, let's let bygones go for now... and anyhow, let's just say for example someone has a certain kind of problem (not saying that it is necessarily true for hacker), then there might be a need for him to change an approach instead of engaging in the same problematic behavior on an ongoing basis?  

Anyhow, if there is some kinds of ways that we could figure out a mutual way forward with this situation that you believe that I should be interested in to help hacker to better help himself in this current situation that does not come off as rewarding bad behavior, then that would be great.  

Firstly it was good to see that you made an effort to address my points
I see we agree that hacker should be treated fairly. That is a good start.

Let's work through this together.
On a scale of 1 to 10 ( 10 being the worst) how would you rate the " claimed" negative behavior of hacker and what are you suggesting should be done about it?

To provide some context let's throw some other members histories into the mix. Please read these threads and conduct your own research.
Then attribute their behaviors a rating 1 -10 and  what should be done about them?
Here are 2 threads for you to take a look at.



https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lauda-scammer-extortionist-nullius-twat-double-standards-cheater-5231720

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nullius-defending-the-scammer-lauda-and-nutildah-terrified-of-open-debate-with-5238490


I would like to see the rating and hear your reasoning.

It is possible that you are not pushing double standards or making favourites here. Or may be you are but you simply are unaware.
I will be more than pleased to have misjudged you.
Your own popularity must not cloud your judgement and cause you to contribute or compound the 2 tier system.

Context is clearly important when determining what is fair or rather consistent.
I mean you can refuse. One must ask themselves though why would you refuse now that you have an open and public opportunity to clearly demonstrate you are fair or that you at least want to be fair.

You need not get into an offtopic discussion here you can compare hackers "claimed" negative behaviors against those other two on their respective threads.

The results after we work through your reasoning and the suggested action can be listed here.
You simply can not and should not be willing to let more serious wrongdoing from your "friends" go " unnoticed " but then join in with those friends attacking other members for possibly far lesser evils.

I am not here to make enemies. It is sadly just how it must be when you put ensuring fair and equal treatment of all members above your own popularity. Im sure if i wished I could have plenty of alts all being very popular. I know this for sure.

Let's see how you respond. I am hoping you will demonstrate you are fair. I will not shy away from fair appraisal of your actions though. Be consistent or be called out for playing favourites.

It is nice to talk to persons that can demonstrate some degree of maturity.
You write very long posts. You pick each piece apart and answer it individually. I like this style. The content is not quite as valuable as my own but I think with some pointers and a little less reaching you do have potential.

After you have demonstrated that you are standing behind your words of fair treatment for hacker.  Then you.must come and break down all of my shitposts and help me see where i have presented all of this false and incorrect shit. I thought it was all just truths with the motive of fair treatment for all members.  Leave that for later though. Lets get hacker sorted out fairly first.

Why wouldn't I stand behind the words of my post?

I am not necessarily going to jump through a bunch of hoops in order to prove anything that I said because I believe that the words of my post largely speak for themselves, whether it is the referred to above post or any other post that I made.  I never delete any of my posts, and if I edit any of my posts, it is usually within a relatively short period of time after i had posted them in order to attempt to make them more clear... In other words, I stand by whatever I post, so you can go back and look through my posting history to your hearts content, if you have nothing better to do... or if you believe that such search and extraction can serve some kind of meaningful or insightful purpose.



If you have been around so long, then why are you hiding behind one account.  Are you going to list your various other accounts, or are you asserting that you have been around a long time merely as an analyst of posts, rather than a participant.

You are trying to assert that you have some kind of credibility that is greater than mine, and surely I am not proclaiming anything about myself, except that I largely have been participating in this forum in order to bat around ideas regarding bitcoin, and surely other topics have come up from time to time, including various meta topics.



I did not know that I had friends, but sure I suppose I might have friends, I guess.

Seems that you are striving to make a BIGGER deal out of some kind of supposed pattern than likely exists, but hey, go ahead with your little playing.... and by the way, can you give a list of all of the other accounts that you have used on this forum, too while you are at it.



Did I claim to be balanced?  Not sure what you are attempting to get at here.  You are trying to assert that there is something wrong with what motivates me to post or what I type or how I give out merits.. or who I put on my trustlist, etc?  You are really grasping with whatever vague assertions you are making.


Again, I did not know that I have friends, but sure you are trying to assert that there is some kind of abusive pattern of behavior that I have been engaged in with my posting, my merits and/or my trustlist... Still pretty damned vague you are bonesjones, or whatever your other names happen to be.



I doubt that there is any need for me to refute any vague assertions from someone who seems to be hiding behind a shitposting and seemingly non-accountable account.  You likely have some kind of burden to substantiate your claims with something better than your merely feeling that you sense a kind of pattern of injustice that is purportedly flowing through my motives.... blah blah blah or whatever you are wanting to proclaim.



I did not realize that I was prescribing any kind of guilt to hacker that would be greater than guilt of any other hypothetical person that you are suggesting to whom I need to be prescribing more guilt.


I say that you are coming off as vague as fuck, and also that you seem to be suggesting that you have been around the forum a long time and implying that you purportedly know some purportedly important things and can identify purported patterns based on your experiences (whether interacting or merely just reading posts), yet the account that you are posting from only shows about a month and a half of forum history and a lot of questioning of your motives for being here based on what you have already posted and also whether you are in breach of forum rules.  You seem to be the one who has questionable patterns rather than yours truly.



I don't see that you have said much of anything beyond vagueness and likely untrue lame spin attempts... so I am likely being too nice to even acknowledge your self-proclaimed insightful inquiries.



Yes, you can label what I do as "punishing," "playing favourites," "corrupt" and/or "collusion," but you have hardly provided any evidence or logic to back up your conclusory assertions.  Your proposed remedy is that either I clean up my purported bad acts/motives or I stay out.  Again.. lots of presumptions coming out of you and even attempting to impose vague standards upon members that might be in a similar position as me.  



I suppose the longer that an account is around, the more popular the account becomes.  I did not realize that I was courting towards popularity, but I suppose that some popularity is kind of inevitable, especially if I have had quite a few interactions with members over the years.. sometimes good interactions and sometimes NOT so good.  Surely I have had a few battles over the years with some members, and sometimes we find a mutual ground or at least reach a truce, and other times some of the battles will re-ignite themselves here and there.  

I have actually found some members to be quite annoyed at some of my posts in terms of their length and sometimes even positions that I have taken on various matters... or maybe even annoyed by my tone, and other styles that can sometimes be unnecessarily confrontational.   Some people seem to like my posting style, and other do not.  

Even you, bonesjones, seem to be saying that you do not like me, so I am NOT very popular with you, right?  Maybe we can attempt to become better forum "friends?"  Are you capable of trying to create a forum "friend?" #nohomo  

As I suggested earlier, I don't really tend to label members as "friends" or not, but hey, maybe I can make an exception for you, since you seem to need (or want) a forum "friend" and we can try to work something out?  

I am thinking that maybe from your perspective, I will only be considered as your "friend" if I comport with your vague standards of behavior?  

I get the sense that you might end up being a kind of bossy friend, but hey, maybe you will prove me wrong?  I do get the sense that something that I had been doing historically seems to already have been causing you to NOT want to be very friendly with me even though it seems to me that we have only been hanging for this one interaction.  Are you interested in bitcoin?  Maybe we can find a mutual interest?

Do we happened to know each other from some other account that you might have had?  Maybe we can begin our "friendship" based on one of your other accounts?  Or do you want to start from this account, or maybe if you start another account?  Perhaps we can figure some way to become buddies? #nohomo.  

Maybe you should let me know, so that I can get to know you somewhat better?  You seem to know me better than I know you, but that is o.k.  we can try to work out some of the bugs, no? even though you don't seem to be coming off as genuinely anyone who is attempting to share meaningful information or trying to make mutually beneficial contributions to the forum that will help other members to use the forum in a way that will be beneficial to them sharing information about bitcoin and sometimes other cryptos...   But, hey, maybe you have some good intentions, and maybe we can both attempt to become more popular by becoming buddies?

So, yeah, even if some of our motives for participating in this forum might not overlap very well, we still might be able to find something in common.  For example, I consider the forum to be a place to share information (and mostly I continue to be interested in bitcoin.. like I already mentioned), and surely, I know that there is a decent cohort out there who are using the forum for various business purposes, and I don't really have anything against those possible business motivations or members who are involved in those activities, but those activities do not really align so tightly with my own motives and purposes for hanging around the forum.  But, I don't mind getting to know someone who might have different interests from my own, but I do tend to gravitate towards members who seem genuine, so there is that... but hey, we can work on your NOT seeming genuine.. and maybe you can improve ur lil selfie, in that direction?  Perhaps?  Perhaps?  We can try to find mutual ground.  I don't want to impose to much upon you in our mutual quest for popularity or whatever ends up being the mutual grounds that we end up agreeing to.


I agree with you.  Hacker should be treated fairly.  We are making progress, no?  

You have no credibility with posts such as this and any attempt to target other users with mock indignation cannot therefore be taken seriously.


This same goes for this terse deflection.

No credibility at all.

Not sure if it was really a question since you answered without waiting for me to respond, but yes, I spent a lot of time on the strawberry jam post. Initially I was planning to go with a bloody knife or a ski mask and a bag full of money but that's too cliche and doesn't quite reflect hacker1001101001's childish excuses and denials. I'm sorry it didn't meet your high standards.


Ah, the Jedi mind trick again.

Do you really stand behind those words?
I have noticed ( and i have been around way longer than you )
That you avoid objectively analysing any negative histories of your " friends " here.
So although when you do look into things you may give a near balanced appraisal it is still a clear double standard you are pushing
You also seem to get interested in peoples histories when that member falls out with your "friends"
This is wrong.
I Can provide a public test of this if you wish to refute the assertion i am making.

Hacker is guilty of less than those you fear or are unwilling to criticise.

What do you say to this? And are you willing to attempt to prove me wrong?

Either punish all fairly or stay out of it. Playing favourites is corrupt and a form of colluision.

You seem to value your own popularity over playing fair. That is my core ctiticism of you.
Hacker should treated fairly

OK, then why else would you include him? If there was another reason seems like you would have taken the opportunity to mention it right now instead of just crying at me. Seems like this is the primary explanation:


which was coincidentally written the same week you included hacker.

The ONLY reason nutilduuuh? There you go again pretending to Ms. Cleo claiming you can read my mind and intent. You clowns make a habit of targeting people for the wrong reasons, so anyone any of the clown car exclude I look into.

WAAAAA people I don't like get to have a say in the system! ONLY ME AND MY FRIENDS SHOULD HAVE A SAY! < Thats you Nutilduuuuuh

You got nerve talking about tit for tat. You are the biggest tit I know.



Ah here we go again. Hacker1001101001 speaks out about trust system abuse against me and gets targeted. I defend him, then you target me because I defended him and suddenly I am equivalent to him. You Bozos need to get a new narrative, this big floppy red shoe of yours is worn out.

I inserted time machine into giant dildo and went back to past to spank hacker with it. He repressed everything that happened back then.

---

OK, I will stop asking questions about you funding various payed ICO bump accounts then  

That is one way of putting it. I know I should not but I did end up laughing at that because if the bagel and strawberry jam were even found in a scan in his stomach he would deny it.

What strikes me is that the evidence is in abundance but those deliberately wanting to close their eyes to the facts because of forum-politics should be ashamed of themselves because it leads to encouraging forum members with ulterior motives to continue to be duplicitous and that is unacceptable from them both.

This thread is delivering some much needed entertainment in a time of crisis.


What's funny is the only reason he included hacker was because I, then you, excluded him.


His inclusion triggered a chain of events which ended up with hacker being in DT2 (apparently he is back off since 4/5).

The only thing that is going to prevent these tit-for-tat inclusions and exclusions from affecting DT is when people higher up in DT1 (with political capital to spare) exclude users like TECSHARE.