Topic: Revoke self-moderating privileges from korner and other hypertrolls (Read 1205 times)

Bump with another egregious example: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5365943

More details in my reply:


Edit - predictably, after my reply korner removed the contents of the OP and moved the thread back to the Russian board, then to Hebrew board, possibly some other board(s), then to Scam Accusations, and again completely replaced it's contents and locked it. The thread is no longer self-mod - probably one of the boards he moved it to killed the self-mod flag, so it's useless to him now. Small wins. Unfortunately I didn't make a full archive copy of the thread when I replied to it but it was a ludicrous accusation against another user.

Edit2 - now he created a new thread with the same accusation:
https://archive.ph/SoTFJ
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/kyc-5391203

I think mods can lock it in a way that users can't unlock but I wouldn't mind it being trashed. Anyway, it's been reported weeks ago.

I have a better link for this:
https://loyce.club/archive/details/topic_5211374.html

Report it so a Mod locks one? I don't know if that would prevent the user from unlocking it again though.

This is one of the most egregious self-mod abuses by korner:

https://loyce.club/archive/topics/521/5211374.html

Original title: After segwit BTC is not Bitcoin anymore!
Original first post:

170+ posts total.

Current title: Attention! Stealing! Forum Staff reselling inactive accounts via Telegram!
Current first post:

And: 129 posts by 85 users with 37 merit deleted.

I think it was also moved to a different board.

---

Time for a monthly bump with example #459 of korner's hypertrollery.

We now have two BSV announcement threads:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bsv-bitcoin-sv-original-satoshi-vision-4985868
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-bsv-bitcoin-sv-original-satoshi-vision-5211986

Apparently at some point he locked the older thread and started a new one: http://archive.is/CEWNP#selection-5443.0-5447.47

Now both are unlocked. Twice the exposure for everyone's favorite shitcoin.

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

Vod started a self moderated thread asking for evidence of his bad behavior and is then deleting everything posted about him.  When a user clearly abuses a feature, it wouldn't be insane to remove the feature from them.

Vod should have self-moderating privileges removed as a result of this behavior.

Lol that would work great  are you a genius in your gene pool or are there even smarter sub humans? Cryptohunter will be immediately screwed if he wants to start self moderated threads under you evil regime.

I tell you what they would like though....no self moderated threads for those with negative feedback. Now that would get them horny.

In your place? Do you mean in the place of laudas favourite cumguzzler ? A proven coward,  backstabber and now liar and trust abuser.
Back to xbox for you kid.

How much ass do you eat generally in a week on here?
I may let you toss my salad if you're a good boy.

Anyway to be sensible, why should people that tell the truth have less privileges than liars and scammers facilitators?
Think about it while your spanking one out over potentially tossing my salad.
Then get back to me .

Your reply should start with. I think people who insist on telling the truth should be prevented from starting self moderated threads because ....

One solution I see is to limit the creation of self-moderated threads by rank. I would like to add that I, in your place, would send such comedians into ignore mode without regret.

Clearly you know you've been defeated again. Your specious arguments have been debunked.
Your argument hinges upon

1. A definition of trolling that you've
a/ you've made up and doesn't match the forums
b/ would mean nearly every member is a troll
c/ would starve the reader of important information
d/ allows scammers on DT to punish any member that presents evidence of their scamming as trolls.

2. Made up events that you can not even find examples of to present to corroborate your fantasies
Whenever you or lauda are asked to present the evidence or examples of what you are claiming to have happened you simply run away.

Clearly this all demonstrates that when you say " hyper trolls " you mean people with legitimate gripes or people that frequently tell the truth about scammers on DT1. Therefore penalizing them in anyway would be unthinkable.
All members should be prevented from creating self moderated threads in rep or none should.

Dt1 are already retaining all the best rev streams  and using DT amd merit to scam with impunity and crush other members free speech, they dont need additional advantages.

There will be no more responding since you're not faithful to me - you're still trolling other threads. I'm heartbroken.

I think it's time for you to create a new account to sneak past ignore lists.

Spoken by another proven hypocrite and willful scam facilitator for pay.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nutildah-willing-to-facilitate-scammers-for-around-300bucks-deleting-evidence-5190369

Read the entire thread.

This is why their false claims of trolling are music honest members ears.

Of course these people want to control every single aspect of posting and have the DT and merit system under their control.

Imagine how much they detest their post histories that reveal what scum bags they are. They hate it so much they will try to sneakily edit them out and misrepresent their actions in a more favorable light.

They hate the truth.   They want to control peoples ability to locate the truth.

There is the clear evidence.  They want to tell you this is " trolling "

They are saying the independently verifiable evidence of their financially motivated wrongdoing is trolling. It is lies the say ? Lol
It is there in black and white by their own hand?

They say that telling the undeniable truth about them is " trolling" and telling the undeniable truth about several of them is " hyper trolling "

Fuck that must be the highest accolade on the entire forum to those that see through their bullshit.

Look at the crazy defense mounted in that thread I have just quoted. It's laughable.  

When the " trolling " doesn't work. They claim presenting the undeniable truth about their past financially motivated wrongdoing is mental illness and sad

This is a pattern of denial, acceptance but excuses,  moving on to irrelevant unsubstantiated personal attack.
It's amusing to watch them squirm.

I wonder what it is in the air that is making the usual trolls extra hyperactive. Their psychosis has been exacerbated by the global lockdown and now they won't rest until everybody knows they have mental/emotional problems. It's a weird, sad cry for help. However there's nothing we can actually do to help them.

Its kind of freeing ignoring them altogether because it allows me to focus on actually interesting things happening on the forum. If the mods don't ban the trolls then the next best thing is to just ignore them and attempt to starve them of attention. That's it. There's no better solution. If you engage them, they win, because that's what they want more than anything else.

Just don't fuel the cycle. Report troll posts as "trolling" and move on without engaging.

@suchmoon read and think before responding.

There are 2 main issue with this debate thus far.

1. You want " trolling " to be defined as suits your needs. Not as it is explained in the rules as I quote below

Here is trolling explained in the rules and a global mod of 6 years explained why bct uses this

However, trolling isn't allowed. If a user is habitually posting obviously false nonsense ("obviously false nonsense" to an outsider, NOT to someone who follows or is involved in the discussion) just to stir up trouble, then it's considered trolling, which is prohibited. Such cases should be thoroughly documented in the report though (There are tons of reports that just say "trolling", but moderators don't have time to look through each user's post).

Obviously False nonsense.   To be not only proven false and totally debunked but so clearly and widely known as debunked that everyone would know about it. I am actually being generous saying that even if not widely known and accepted but there is evidence you can provide that conclusively debunks it then to repeat it again as true I would accept that as trolling.

A global mod for 6 years explained why this is this boards regulated definition of trolling.
There was a large debate about it with ch in meta.

Now as to you other specious suggestions and false allegations.

1. Speculation on alts accompanied by the corroborating evidence as in my above example don't make up a part of trolling. They are not at all trolling. They have nothing to do with trolling at all.

2. I would like an example of where I , ch, or Toaa have accused a member of a crime and have not supplied corroborating evidence. Evidence that is compelling. I want to see where any of the evidence was debunked. The evidence was independently verifiable  and conclusive in my opinion or at the least was never even in danger of being debunked. That is so far from trolling it is trolling to even suggest it was trolling.

Making it up? You are making this all up. Bring me examples. I have never seriously accused anyone of any crime without compelling  strong evidence to corroborate or even evidence that is undeniably conclusive.
Bring the specific example here and present it.

This is the same kind of false accusations lauda was making against CH. Ch challenged the scammer lauda multiple times to present his evidence of his claims and everytime lauda ran away because he could not.

The key points are there. If you can not accept the boards definition of trolling that is your own problem.

To say " inflammatory garbage" is the same as saying inflammatory ( which is irrelevant as explained by myself and the global mod who explained you would need complete personal knowledge of every member to know if something was being said to attack or inflame them personally ) garbage ( proven false ).

You are still running away from bringing specific examples of what you claim has taken place. Look if I have been accusing members of crimes with no compelling evidence at all then bring them here for analysis. Even better if you can bring evidence of me accusing members of crimes that have been conclusively debunked. You will not bring them will you? Because they do not exist.

You are making things up.

Also disregarding trolling and just going to off topic irrelevant you tried that with CH and could not even demonstrate one of his deleted posts here was off topic or irrelvant when you attempted to you simply ran off.

You can be banned for off topic irrelevant too but this also needs to be investigated thoroughly.

@lfcbitcoin how are you still able to even show your face here. Even suchmoon doesn't trust you. Well I'm sure hell say that he has forgiven you now and you are trustworthy again. But that's not how trust works. If suchmoon believes you did try to misrepresent your private conversations to such a degree they were moved to exclude you I don't think that is repairable really.  Trust you can't just choose to give out because it suits you.

You are a conclusively proven liar and a coward. If you want evidence for my statements then read here.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/lfcbitcoin-laudas-feltching-clown-total-shit-poster-and-scumbag-poetry-5136759

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.54986956

Page 6 of the link contained within that post.

You think you should have any privileges here? You should be allowed self moderated threads when others are not?

Please don't make me laugh.

You are a conclusively proven liar found to be abusing the trust system and a coward taking orders from a proven scammer. You should be banned. Not spamming away for dust.


+++++++++++++ back to not talking to lfcbitcoin the conclusively proven liar and coward ++++++++++++++


Any serious allegation or accusation I have made against a member , the design of the merit and trust systems I stand 100% with that and will do so until they are conclusively debunked or even a strong case that stands against them. People have had a long time to debunk the points ch and Toaa made. No debunking exists.

Off topic and irrelevant and lacking corroborating evidence

The sky is blue and you are morons.

Is entirely separate from trolling. Where you are promugating proven false information  as true.

Both are serious but 1 is crystal clear. The trolling. There is no need for opinion.

Off topic and irrelevant is far more complex. ( obviously not that example of sky blue you are morons)  but there needs to be a balance between furnishing the reader with the full story and picture so they are given the optimal chance of gaining the optimal or most accurate opinion and overload of irrelevant data.

Actually theymos has said if it is loosely related you have to make sure it ties in and is closely related at points also.

I think only CH and Toaa attempted to define a guide to permitted flow and nobody was interested in creating a definitive guide to permitted flow because the truth is they want to change it when it suits them.

There could be stringent guides and examples for permitted flow. I Dont have issue with that if everyone has to follow it.

With this remove self mod for " hyper trolls "

Meta has no self mod and I like it best that way
If the person is off topic and irrelevant then a mod can remove it 
If the person is not off topic and irrelevant the why deprive the reader of that information. 

The reader should be given the full pictures much as possible.
Hiding info that is on topic and relevant demonstrates fear of the truth or perhaps wanting the reader to have a distorted opinion based on an overly zoomed in and limited view.

Finding the definitive  truth is the most important thing. Failing that possibility  then gaining an optimal opinion is the next best thing.
Just being told what the popular view is and given no opportunity to explore all possible data for yourself is totally unacceptable.

I agree, suchmoon!

Can we add cryptohunter, The-One-Above-All & all his other alts to the banned from starting self-modded threads too, please.

It’s very frustrating seeing you’ve had posts selectively deleted from a thread which alters the context of what other people are reading.

Thanks

In the last 2 days Bitcoin SV posted in these topics:
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/511/5117342.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/513/5136576.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/517/5178098.html (3 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/521/5211374.html (3 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/521/5211986.html (2 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/521/5215763.html (2 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/524/5241511.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/526/5261773.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/526/5264587.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5275550.html (4 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5275790.html (2 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5275811.html (1 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5276004.html (2 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5276043.html (2 posts)
http://loyce.club/archive/topics/527/5277084.html (2 posts)
Note to self: If I need this again, see korner.txt.

This confirms his early bumping.

Merely accusing someone of sockpuppeting is not trolling if that's all there is to it. But when you start making shit up to fit your narrative, and derail threads with off-topic walls of text (merely referring to the same people who are participating in the thread does NOT make it on topic), and create a bunch of new threads every time someone you don't like does something you don't like, and attack them with all sorts of derogatory shit... that may amount to trolling. That's what you and some others (e.g. Timelord2067) tend to do when things don't go their way. If you just post a neutral or a neg rating (depending on circumstances) and perhaps create one thread explaining why you think the person is a sockpuppet, preferably while not hiding behind a sockpuppet yourself - that'd be a different story.

And again, sockpuppeting allegations are just a small part of your trolling. You have accused others of various other "crimes" and you have attacked pretty much everyone who dares to disagree with you. Then when people get sick of your attacks and hit "Ignore" - you claim they're running away.


Being possibly partially correct doesn't make you not a troll. Trolling is off-topic inflammatory garbage. If you post "sky is blue and you're all morons" in every thread - that would still be trolling even if it may be partially possibly correct.


You have presented it more than enough times for anyone who cares to be aware of it. Dust off your legendary account, add links to your "evidence" threads into your signature and start contributing something positive to the community. I bet your "evidence" would be seen as far more credible that way.


See that's the other thing. You're demanding examples and "debunking" but you would never accept it. You will never admit being wrong. Many users have tried to reason with you and it always ends with you calling them names. Thus the yellow diamond sign.


Can you point to where "trolling" is defined in "board rules"?


Warning others of possibly getting trolled is not crushing anything. Such a warning is part of free speech too. Learn to accept it and learn to present your argument in a less disruptive way, instead of trying to force everyone do debate with you.

I believe you are only pretending not to understand the concept.

Provably false information as true.

The.. I know I'm not lauda defense is just silly anyone could say that. Just as I could say I know I'm not cryptohunter.
Since as you say proof of sockpuppeting or not is never going to be 100% conclusive we can move on from that.

When you say : take my proof apart even considering the scare quotes is attempting to insinuate that I was attempting to or even considering it myself as proof. We both know that is untrue.

Let me make it clear. If I say that I suspect you are lauda and present corroborating evidence such as

1. Similar caustic posting style.
2. First to oppose the flag on lauda even though it contains iron clad evidence of deception and lying for financial gain
3. First to back stab theymos for requesting a scammer and trust abuser like lauda is removed from DT
4. Had lauda on your trust list for along time
5. I've seen others mention they thought you spoke Croatian
6. Seemingly close with others lauda are close with.

This is NOT trolling. It is not even near to trolling. You can't expect that to be a bannable offense.

I said when lauda was in real trouble not when he's already on the way out of DT and you see the writing on the all.

Other idiots on DT cast out allegations of socks on zero evidence and leave red tags on the bases of such ludicrous claims. I mean if you have no corroborating evidence at all that stands up to scrutiny then that is weak sauce. You must get them all banned for trolling surely?


If I said the merit and therefore the DT system is full of holes and provided evidence and argument that nobody can debunk then of course it is probable that I'm correct or certainly possible. Therefore how could that be trolling. ?

Being disruptive is a positive of the current consensus is favouring or based upon false or corrupt interpretation of the available evidence. For example if you are all lauding the achievements and positive contribution of a certain member and unaware or conveniently ignoring the fact there is proof of scamming and trust abuse. Then bringing that evidence to light so that the reader may have access to the full story to evaluate is positive. How could anyone consider this trolling.

It is clear that you and many here wish tell deliberate lies and obfuscate the truth or plausibly true statements by branding it hyper trolling
Or trolling. When in all of those cases you can not even present a plausible counter argument to cast doubt on those statements because you know that the evidence is either conclusive or too strong to rebut.

I will demand specific examples of conclusively debunked  being presented as true before trolling can be established.

Inflammatory and disruptive is positive in a corrupt or deliberately misleading environment for those wishing to locate the truth.

As I have said claiming someone is trolling when you have not conclusively debunked their claims is actually trolling.
You are essentially saying you have proof they are deliberately lying, when really you are lying because you have no proof of that at all.

No, you are asking for a double standard that is based upon your incorrect or deliberately incorrect definition of what trolling is per the board rules.

You can't say every time someone says something that they can not conclusively  prove they must be banned for trolling.
However you can say that some who deliberately and intentionally promulgates conclusively debunked information  as true should be warned with clear explanation then banned if they continue attempting to deceive people.

It's a good step that you point out that your silly little image does not contain the word trolling.
Since you would find it impossible to provide any specific example on any of those threads that satisfy the boards definition of trolling.

Still you are clearly attempting to tell others to stop the discussion. This specific tactic employed by you and that other idiot oeioei to crush free and open debate here.

You have never demonstrated one specific example of trolling. Imagine attempting to demonstrate  hyper trolling.  It is ridiculous.

I know for a fact that I'm not Lauda's alt. So I can surely make that statement. Whether anyone wants to believe me or your made-up "proof" - it's up to them. It is well known that it's impossible to disprove sockpuppeting conclusively even with KYC. So let's take your "proof" apart:


I don't know which flag you're talking about. I have opposed many frivolous flags.


If this is about that PM - I thought and still think it was ill-conceived regardless of who the target was. There's a lot of scum (to borrow your word) in DT1 and theymos is not taking any action against e.g. peloso, which is quite puzzling considering the attitude towards Lauda. But all other things being equal I'd rather have no action (and leaving it up to the community to decide) rather than mass PMs trying to tilt the scales. Keep in mind that anyone else sending such unsolicited PM would risk a ban if users report it.


Considering that I'm excluding Lauda and generally disagree with quite a few Lauda's actions I don't think "always" is accurate.


Guilty as charged.


I don't.


It's not the alt accusation that makes you a troll. It's the disruptive inflammatory walls of text you post all over the forum, whether it's about Lauda, or DT, or merits, or moderators deleting your posts, or any other "issues" that you make up as you go.


I never accused you of scamming so that's a straw man right there.


It's a warning. What users do with it - it's up to them. What you think about it - I don't care. It doesn't even say "troll" BTW.


I see no reason to do that but feel free to convince me that the forum would be better of without me in DT1 and I'll consider it.


I don't think we should take away the self-mod privilege from all users just because a few hypertrolls abuse it.

I agree with ignore their threads if you don't like them or feel they will treat you unfairly.



Nobody decides if someone is trolling as per the board rules and the explanation of a global mod of 6 years.

You prove the information they are presenting is provably false and if they repeat it as true you can report them for trolling. Simple. Remember real trolling as per the board rules is a bannable offense. So you can't just claim people are trolling without having iron clad proof. Even scammers are not banned even if you provide incontrovertible proof.

I am personally in favor of classifying all unproven accusations relating to behavior on this forum as trolling. If you claim someone has conducted certain activity here you must be able to prove that.
If you say you suspect even then you should be forced to provide strong corroborating evidence.

This goes for ALL members no more double standards.
This thread is calling for double standards.

Everyone here has the same opportunity which is to have their evidence, arguments and points analysed publically.

Why don't you just ignore their threads.

When I saw a self-modded thread from those people, If I have something to say, I create a duplicate thread and post there. Since I know either most or all of my posts will get deleted, there is no point in posting in their threads.

Who gets to decide who is trolling anyway... Ignore them, problem solved.

1. You can't just say something isn't true and therefore it become provably untrue. That is ridiculous.
Please read the post carefully.  I have also posted evidence I consider to be corroborating previously why it is plausible you're an alt of lauda. Also you are yet to explain your strange action of being first to oppose a flag where there is iron clad evidence of deception and lying for financial gain. Aka scamming. First to backstab theymos for daring to ask a proven scammer and trust abuser like lauda removed from DT. Always first to intervene when lauda is in any real danger. A similar very " caustic " posting style. Others have mentioned that they think you speak Croatian.
Knowingly presenting provably false information as true. Not as you are doing here yourself saying you believe someone is an alt of someone and presenting what you consider corroborating evidence. This is done by most of DT1. They are all trolls by your standards which do not match the forums definition anyway.

2. No conclusive proof.  Treated like cryptohunter? Goes back to again never having been able to demonstrate he knowingly presented conclusively false information as true or ever committed financially motivated wrong doing?   So no trolling there or scamming.
So there again by deliberately and knowingly you are promugating false information as true by claiming he was guilty of trolling as per boards definition.  

3. Your posts clearly say cryptohunter do not feed the troll. Do not..
You are attempting to prevent others entering legitmate discussion. That Is wrong.

4. Request yourself that you are blacklisted from DT entirely to demonstrate you don't wish to be on DT1.

5. If there is no self moderated in rep for anyone that would be fair.
People should have access to all of the on topic relevant information.

Ok, I'll respond until you start posting elsewhere, which I guess means this will be the only response.


For example, you have accused myself and other users of being sockpuppets of each other. That's false. However that's not the full extent of your trolling. You constantly derail threads and create new threads attacking other users for no other reason than just having disagreements with them. That's trolling.


Your posting style, topics, verbiage, and pretty much everything about you is solid proof. Honestly I'd have more respect for you if you just admitted it or posted from your main account. OTOH even if I'm wrong, if you're impersonating cryptohunter so well you fully deserve to be treated like you're him.


I don't demand. I post a warning. I have not red-trusted you and have not taken any actions or made threats against users for talking to you or even supporting you so it's definitely a false claim that I'm demanding to end discussions. If someone wants to waste their time with you - more power to them.


Vote me out of DT1, see if I care.

Suchmoon seems to have missed the points I made above.
He is still stalking my threads and trolling there.

1. He can not produced any evidence to support his claims of my presenting provably false information as true. So no proof of trolling.
2. He has no conclusive proof that I'm the alt of anybody.
3. He is demanding that my discussions and debates are ended and that members cease posting their points in response to my own.

Suchmoons actions are entirely toxic and prevent free speech at a far more serious level that bitcoinSV

Suchmoon is advocating here for a further imbalance on the forum favouring DT1. Anyone they claim is trolling should not be permitted self moderation. However suchmoon classes presenting incontrovertible proof of financially motivated wrong doing by his DT1 friends or Alts are trolling. So you can see where that would be punishing whistleblowers further.

Better to just prevent all self mod in rep for everyone.

You will engage with me on all of my threads and help by self debunking the initial opposition you offer.
Or just hide up.
" the very notion that I would be contained to one thread when I have so much knowledge and experience to offer the forum is completely  ludicrous "  as one legendary member has said before.

What can you offer me in terms of debate? I can find only self debunking or running away in your post history when dealing with real masters of debate. Well ..except unintentional support and credibility that is
 Lol.

korner has another highly irritating habit of deleting and re-posting bumps within 24 hours. It's a PITA to report that shit and honestly I don't even know how effective such reports can be since the dipshit will likely delete their post before a moderator can look at the report.

LoyceV's archive shows korner's binge bumping but unfortunately it doesn't show which threads it was on or whether there were posts in between so you'd have to review each one to see what's going on: https://loyce.club/archive/members/237/2371095.html

---

My offer to indulge you in one thread still stands if you can refrain from posting your walls of text elsewhere. But I'm guessing you'll weasel out of this again.

Suchmoron was challenged by Cryptohunter to present the trolling aka the false information they were presenting as true. This challenge to present examples of the trolling was given many times. Suchmoon ran away each and every time.

Suchmoron fails to realize that he is indeed the troll.
It is quite undeniable.

1. He was for months screaming that merit was a sensible,  valuable and reliable metric for indicating a great poster and a firm basis for DT or trust.  He went as far as to say that it was stupid to even suggest that some of the 99.93% of the forum were capable of making posts as good as some of the posts made by the top 0.07% of the board (based on merit earned).
Then later was found claiming good poster and bad poster were meaningless terms without strict criteria and definition for them to be measured against. Therefore demonstrating he was just spouting BS for months to troll the sensible and credible member Cryptohunter that had been saying that all along.

Suchmoron and the DT1 protection racket scum fear the truth and presentation of inconvenient events from their post histories.
If you bring up their previous wrong doing and present the evidence which they can't deny.
They will merely say you are trolling them or that you are mentally Ill.

Trolling as per the board rules is knowingly presenting false information as true.
This is DT1's roll speciality. Definitely Trolls 1.

Watch how they will attempt to mislead people away from independently verifiable truths by claiming you are trolling.
So what they are saying is the truth you are presenting is a lie? Because that is what trolling is: deliberately and intentionally presenting false information as true or claiming true and correct information is a lie or incorrect.

 Regarding self moderated threads. DT1 will often make threads with false accusations and then not allow the person accused or being discussed to post on that thread. Chief culprits of this are thepharmacist,  loyceV, and malboroza and suchmoon is all to happy to contribute and also repeatedly post off topic BS in self moderated threads others make.

DT1 are a bunch of undeniably corrupt cry babies most have instances of financially motivated wrong doing in their post histories or openly support and protect those that do.

Pathetic crying from suchmoron and the other scumbags.

2. The scumbag suchmoon was first to oppose the flag on lauda but would not dare even start to debate why he did so.

Anytime you bring evidence he can not deny suchmoon runs to the hyper troll term.
He is terrified of getting into specifics.

The same for loyceV. I note on his self moderated appeal for support for flags he removed the appeal for support of the lauda flag even though the evidence was reviewed by gmax and he said it was clearly shitty behavior. He's abusing the self moderated threads frequently.


These scum bags will always collude and stick together to protect their chipmixer sigs and other rev streams.

They fear the truth, they can't deny it since it is there for review but they will use any and all means including screaming hyper troll to attempt to mislead people. That is when handing out tags and flags doesn't work.

They simply do not understand you can't ban the truth.
Ban self moderated threads in rep for ALL  members. . There is no reason to have them there anyway.

It's simple: if you can conclusively prove a person is promugating false information or claiming that provably true statements are false (same thing really) then you provide the evidence to prove them wrong, and if they keep repeating it then they are trolling aka deliberately spreading bullshit.

If you can not, or they can prove what they are saying is true, then trying to discredit that by claiming they are trolling is actually trolling on your part. Most people screaming trolling are those that fear sensible debate regarding their or their friends histories here.

DT1 is rotten. Even mild examination of the most vocal and regular DT1 members demonstrates that clearly.

Suchmoon and most DT1 are imbeciles

They can't get through their thick skulls a few simple points.

1. The independently verifiable  truth is not trolling.
2.  Making relevant on topic posts are permitted even if they contain inconvenient truths about them
3. Claiming independently verifiable truths are trolling is actually trolling by them
4. I will record and present a strong case for any of my posts that are deleted. I will make a huge fuss and demand an explanation that stands up to scrutiny that proves my post was off topic or containing knowingly false information.
5. Posts deleted that are on topic and highly relevant demonstrate mod bias.
6. Mod bias especially by mods wearing sigs should be mentioned publically to sponsors.
7. Mods hiding up that know they would be unable to demonstrate a post was off topic but still deleted it must be slammed hard or the forum is open to gross and legitimate criticism of corruption.



Once they could grasp those simple points they would stop crying constantly and hopefully they would stop telling lies and trying to mislead the readers.

Let members post on topic relevant and truthful information where and when they want.
Simple. If you dont have anything to hide and no paid agenda to push.

You have you red tags and flags to crush free speech dont request further advantages.

the only way is ban all self mod. then slowly whitelist members.

i for one would not like to see that as i self mod a lot. i dont want my self mod privilege remoeved.

As an update to the above, I had my post declaring my innocence deleted by bitcoin SV. As noted above, as a basic principle of fairness, the accused should have the ability to defend themselves in any thread about them.

Taking this on a bit of a rant here, but theymos and the other staff / mods don't really seem to care.
I understand their "hands off" attitude.

But, when they can make that one simple change to not allow self mod on all posts in the altcoin announcements board to not allow and spread of malware or simply ban other users that are very obviously alts to avoid bans. Then I think this is low / no priority item.

-Dave

I'm pretty sure anyone who reported cryptohunter et al over the last couple of years has given up hope for that rule to ever be enforced.

---

As an experiment I reported some of Excimer's (korner's sock du jour) posts for trolling - mostly random [necro]bumps on false accusations against users who neg-trusted Bitcoin SV and/or other alts of korner. Five reports for that plus a few shitposts in Off Topic. The latter usually get deleted, done that before. Will let you know what the success rate is on the troll reports.

---

A new thread where korner is talking to himself now: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5215763

---

Update on the troll reports - all "Good". Whichever mod took the time to look into this - thank you.

Alternative users in that board can create a similar topic to what korner is creating and start a normal discussion from them. To avoid some kind of plagiarism offense users before creating the topic should tweak their topic and give a reason why they created a similar topic, aside from that before creating it they should make the moderator aware on why they are doing that. In this way they could effectively avoid topics created by him, the lesser attention you give to him the more he will quiet down by himself.

I think self-moderated threads are making more harm and not just regarding this case, but in many other abuses or creating scam fake ANN topics.
I would rather see them disabled for all users then having current situation.
Best solution would be to disable creation of self-moderated threads manually for abusers, scammers and newbies.
They could still create regular moderated topics.

Or after a few reports the "no trolling" rule would be enforced. Just saying...

Same can be said about almost any board but there are legitimate uses for it, such as to keep aforementioned trolls out. If I want to discuss something not related to cryptohunter/korner/Quickseller/etc but I know that they will cling to the topic like flies to a pile of dung I'd rather have it self-moderated than bother moderators with it.

To put it another way, removing that option from whole boards and inconveniencing legitimate users would mean trolls won.

Was just wondering... what are the benefits of allowing self-mod threads in the Reputation board in general?
If you're gonna throw sh*t at someone might as well do it in plain sight.
Maybe Scam Accusations as well.
Mostly going forward not retroactively.
Thoughts?

Yeah me too damnt.  Is this TOAA/CH or just a different lunatic ?

Oops I fell for it

At the very least email addresses should have to be verified in order to create an account.

I know theymos wants to keep the barrier to entry extremely low, but as of now its simply too low.

We're not going to risk driving away the "next satoshi" by requiring verification of the provided email address.

Also, the "no trolling" rule should probably be better enforced. If a user contributes nothing but disruption, that should be grounds for banning. We're not supposed to tag people for being trolls but at the same time the mods nearly never enforce this rule. Which means accounts should be tagged for being trolls until the rule is reasonably enforced.

Ideally - yes, not feeding the troll would be great but it's clearly not working and the troll is extremely disruptive. Some of those topic don't start out as trolling but eventually korner edits them, selectively removes posts, etc making it looks completely different than what the actual discussion was.

Limiting the existing accounts - or better yet, banning them - would raise the cost of trolling. Korner would need to create new accounts, farm them up, and then when those accounts inevitably expose themselves they could be limited/banned again. Look at the Bitcoin SV account - I think a lot of users feel compelled to respond because it looks like an official BSV account but in fact it has nothing to do with CSW or BSV. Taking that away would cripple korner's trollpower quite a bit.

Edited for spelling.

I don't think removing his privilege from creating self-moderated threads will stop him for continuing what he is doing, he can simply just create a new account in order to create self-moderated threads from that point. The discussion about him on the other thread was right where just by simply avoiding the topics he created this problem wouldn't exists, just by simply not posting in his thread you aren't feeding him any kind of satisfaction for his trolling.

Yet another self-moderated troll post from SV.  :/


Does anyone want to follow a leader who massively abuses trust systems?  He left several dozen flags against old, respected members here.   Now he is complaining to Theymos that we are hostile to him.   

Let me re-phrase - Does anyone want to follow a leader who has lower intelligence and situational awareness than most people? 

This poster is worthless and degrades the forum considerably. No idea why its most prominent accounts haven't been given perma bans, not that it'll slow it up all that much.

Predictably korner deleted his trollthread about Quickseller and created a new one to appeal the hostility towards Bitcoin SV. I'm sure theymos will jump right on to fix this injustice.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5275550

As a trolljob it's quite crafty - mentioning CSW is bound to generate some responses.

I found a similar request from 2007: Lauda should have his ability to delete posts in Self Moderated thread removed.

It has been done before:

This is why commercial websites and service industry force users to verify their phone numbers and email addresses with an OTP so that they can not create the multiple accounts and take the benefits if any.

I think this modification needs to be done on the bitcointalk as well. I'm not sure how people will react to this but it's gonna hurt people with 50 and 100 alts. LOLZ.

May be theymos won't accept this considering this comment here:

I think there needs some hard decisions to be made to increase the forum quality. It will benefit everyone down the line from mods to users, and from advertisers to campaign managers for quality work.

---

^##I know this is all about self moderating privileges and associated acts but this is happening because people has access to multiple accounts and they move on immediately to next one after getting banned.

7 of my insightful old posts criticizing BSV were deleted yesterday by the same hypertroll mentioned in the OP. I support the proposal of stopping such fudster from creating self moderated threads.

This person is creating what is effectively scam accusations in the reputation sub as self moderated threads. This prevents the accused from bring able to respond.

This person should either have to post threads in the correct sub, or have the ability to remove posts in his self moderated threads removed.

This is not a function of his beliefs, associations, or who he is attacking. It is a function of basic fairness to those he is accusing.

Here is the newest gem:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5274890

I'm not a fan of Quickseller but I really doubt the accusation true. And it's a self-mod thread so you can easily guess what will happen. I'm failing to see what possible value this kind of behavior has for the forum. "Bitcoin SV" and other shitpuppets acting this way should be banned or nuked but if that's not possible for some reason - why not just stop them from creating self-mod threads.

It may depend on who is handling the situation, the admins could be more liberal in handing out bans for suspected links between accounts than regular mods. Theymos may also not be privy of the situation.
For what it's worth Korner has long been autobanned along with a huge number of his alt accounts, the issue is they push out more new troll accounts each time.
The mods would be at a loss between allowing free speech or following their hunch and shutting dowm such potential alt accounts who share habits with a previously banned account. To me it's a clear case of evasions, but I'm not the one burdened with carrying out the action.

Self mod threads is encouraged as it is used to prevent spam, putting a price on it would be counter productive. A rank up criteria could work theoretically, with jr member as the minimum threshold. it would be abused to a extent, but can reduce the rate of new trolls.

He also wrote this:


I don't see any reason why iamnotback would be subject to a permanban and not korner or bitcoin sv or whatever his account right now is, every single thing that theymos mentioned above also applies to him, from making a topic unusable to keeping on evading bans.

Remember those golden words:

Great minds discuss bitcoin ideas.  (BPIP, Basements)
Average minds discuss bitcoin events. (News, Scams, Airdrops)
Small minds discuss bitcoin people. (Politics/Drama)

Right, that's the theory. Now in practice the hypertrolls figured out other ways to get the attention, such as creating frivolous flags and fake accusations and amplify them by abusing self-mod/locking. If you oppose such flags you're supposed explain yourself in the referenced thread but you can't because it's locked and there is another thread but it's self-mod. Basically people get drawn into these trolling schemes not because they really want to feed the troll but sometimes just by following good forum practices.

After that thread End of newbie restrictions; ban changes that was made in January 2014, theymos repeatedly emphasized that there will no longer be newbie jails. I am going to search and give more posts of theymos.

Historical changes of newbie jails

In the announcement thread for self-moderated feature, theymos wrote
I think we can take it and move onwards by sticking with the core approach "Don't feed the troll".

Trollers create such threads to troll and catch attention of readers and posters. If no one replies to such threads, they won't keep their monologue for too long. It reduces traffics in trolling-threads and also discourages them to create other trolling-threads.

They'd be forced to use and expose their other accounts. I would prefer to have them banned on sight but perhaps removing self-mod privilege after abusing it a few times (and/or the lock feature, which as Rizzrack pointed out is also being abused) would be better than nothing.


That would punishing all users for the actions of one lunatic. I'm proposing punishing (well, mildly admonishing really) just the one lunatic.


If those features are being abused beyond any reasonable "free speech" excuse then there should be some sort of limit to that. I'd be ok with the locking restrictions but it would still not prevent the perp from creating self mod threads and that is quite a nuisance even without the whole flag situation. Perhaps the limit should be one self-mod thread per 10 merits earned or something like that .

And again, the right call would be to enforce ban evasion rules until the troll runs out of clean IPs and money for copper accounts but this is not working in this case.


Read the threads referenced in the OP when you get a chance. This troll takes it to a whole new level. Sure they could still troll without self-mod, and they could create self-mod threads with new alts before they get detected, etc. But if there is at least some restriction on those activities once the sockpuppets start abusing forum privileges then I think it would have a cooling effect. Right now there is absolutely nothing to reign them in. Flags can't be reported to mods and are not moderated anyway. Locking/self-mod abuses are not really moderated either.

My thinking on this exactly.  But not only is this something Theymos isn't likely to act on, this is also a good point:

This guy will continue to troll the forum to death regardless of whether he can create self-moderated threads or not, so that kind of restriction probably wouldn't even be productive.  Apparently korner is a Russian troll?  I think I've heard his name before, but I can't say I remember any of his posts or that he had such a negative reputation.

Nah, let's not go that route.  There are times when you want/need to make a local rule that a certain member or group of members can't post in your thread, and when they end up doing it anyway I think you ought to be able to nuke their post(s) quickly and without having to go through the mods.

You have a point there...
Though I would say the abuse is locking the reference thread for the flag. He cannot add a self-mod thread as reference but instead opens a normal thread and locks it.

I propose that flag reference threads can be locked only by mods and preferably only in certain situations like when OP removed support and issue solved and there is no more useful info just spam... perhaps then. Just an idea.

To revoke forum features for some particular users might not be the right call.

If we can't stop him from creating alts and post here how is taking this privilege from a few of his accounts going to work?
We're talking about a lunatic who had at least 55 accounts on this forum, right now nothing is going to stop him, even if you ban all active ones he will come up with 50 more, this is his way of enjoying life.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see this happening but I also know that following the forum rules and the way theymos think about, let's call it freedom of speech nothing will change. And no,I'm not going to suggest ignore, the amount of spam and nonsense that comes from that guy can flood even Switzerland...and Nepal 

I would say lets' get rid of self-moderated topics in reputation, but...that will also end in a shitshow.

If we're not banning korner's alts can we at least prevent them from creating self-modded threads? They create accusations, even trust flags, then routinely delete posts in the subsequent discussions. It's quite clear that they just abuse the self-mod feature as another way to troll people (and spam via indirect notification PMs LOL).

Taking self-mod privilege away would probably remove a large part of the incentive for korner (and other proven hypertrolls like cryptohunter) to keep creating those threads. And yes, I know we shouldn't feed the trolls to begin with, etc, but honestly can we expect every user to be aware of all these disruptive sockpuppets. There should be a more direct punishment for abusing a forum feature in this way. Right now since ban evasion can't be proven to moderators' satisfaction there are basically no consequences for this. You can't even report it.

For example:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5215552 now has 13 posts, used to be 90+: https://loyce.club/archive/topics/521/5215552.html

User in question for those not familiar with the backstory:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/troll-abuses-self-moderated-topics-in-russian-local-5155000
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/the-many-accounts-of-korner-bitcoin-sv-5211434