Topic: Should Ratimov aka Symmetrick be in DT1? - page 7. (Read 9825 times)

I would have felt more sympathy for him if he had a good reason to cancel (90% of) his sponsorship, instead of doing it after something that looks like a tandrum. But I think the end result would have been the same: no tags handed out.

This new nickname fits nicely

In the past week, at least 4 users got a name change.

Thanks 1miau, but I believe there is enough time to announce the winner since we are not even close to the block number yet. So, I guess the mempool will have fewer unconfirmed transactions. I would love to contribute these tiny 0.5 mBTC, and I will send it whenever I see the mempool has cooled down a little bit. It feels good to see you come back, try to improve yourself, and take things positively. Please allow others to criticize if they can in a healthy way. I am sure you will find a lot of positive things in it. More importantly, avoid trolls. You won't be able to satisfy them.  

Had a small question, 1miau. What giveaway?

Apparently, I always miss important events, I wonder why I sleep so much!

Unlike him, you have shown integrity by acting reasonably. I'm glad that's the case. You still need to try to ignore the trolls, who couldn't wait for the chance to crucify someone with authority.


He did not open that thread, nor is he the initiator of the contest, but Halab. Ratimov later got involved with sponsorship, Even without his sponsorship, there was prize money.
Certainly, everything he has done lately shows a really bad character.


It is possible to change the username if there are valid reasons for it. It was discussed after the post you quoted.


Are you being sarcastic here?
If you pay a little more attention to all his steps and how it was seen by the other members of the forum, you will understand that it was not exactly played the best by Ratimov, on the contrary, it's almost disastrous.

The OPs may seem brand new but you can not do anything with the quotes and mentions, can you?

That's what I thought too. But after reading a few members I interpreted it like this:
I promised to send donation to a charity but at some point my circumstance changed, I can apologize as a gentleman and seek a leave. A few members thought it as a donation and if that's the case then I think it's okay not to be harsh towards the account.

Although considering everything that happened and judging by all of it, I do not think Ratimov is worthy to trust with any kind of cash [corn] but if we start leaving negative feedback for it then I think his forum journey will over. I don't think he will have any motivation to continue since many campaign managers will not consider him valuable for their campaigns.

You may be confused, since you did not read most recent posts made within this thread. For Ratimov Symmetrick the situation is exactly the opposite from being in his favor.

Hold on, what just happened? How did Ratimov manage to pull off a username change? You take a week off from a thread, and it's like stepping into an alternate universe – either the thread got wiped out, or we've got a brand-new OP. Absolutely mind-blowing! Hats off to Ratimov, seriously well played.



I'm speculating that all these discussions and topics might have played a role in convincing the higher-ups. Looks like the tide turned in his favor amidst all these allegations.

When someone opens a thread and offers to sponsor a contest, they should just send those funds to someone to hold and consider them gone. There's no reason for them to be able to back out then. Look at all the merits folks gain by hosting contests and such. Building reputation and using it to their advantage, but when shit hits the fan they change their name and kill the contests then try to fade away.

Totally unacceptable IMO.

Well if you want reasoning, since there is no written contracts on paper, typing the words and posting them should be enough of evidence.
How do the escrow providers operate if not by posting? Though they provide signed message as proof of holding the funds, not as proof who is posting, so the post alone is logically considered a written contract.

They have received their implicit benefit out of this sponsorship, the participants however did not receive the promised benefits.

---

On a side note, love how you guys are worried about leaving a tag and want to have solid reasoning. Wish we had that in our universe where I'm from.😅

But the offer was not contingent on him getting a certain amount of reputation or something like that. The way the offer was made it looked like him calling himself a "sponsor" was all he wanted out of it. He gets that for about 11 months out of 12, and then withdraws the offer. Does not seem right no matter how I try to look at it.

And even IRL courts often don't consider "fairness" in contract disputes. In other words, if Sym engaged in a bad deal, that's kinda his own fault.

Anyway, I'm not advocating for red trust, but I also probably wouldn't oppose a flag if any of the participants of the contest can provide solid reasoning based on the facts of this "sponsor" deal alone (without detours to plagiarism and all the other drama).

All of my giveaways will be paid out as planned. I'll publicly announce the winners when the giveaways will conclude.


That's very nice from you but I'll cover these 0.5 mBTC for you to avoid tx fees. 
Many thanks for your contribution of course.

1miau returned the funds he received from sponsors and the rest funds his own funds. I don't think he was motivated by Ratimov in any way. Ratimov was a sponsor there and promised to contribute to the prize pool. He could do it and leave it if he wanted. But in 1miau's case, he was the organizer and was planning to take a break. He already left the signature campaign. Moreover, 1miau decided to continue the giveaway, and he edited his posts already as he said in another thread;


I was one of the sponsors, and I received the funds. Since he decided to continue the giveaway, I will send the funds once again. This should prove that a person like 1miau cannot be motivated by "Trick".

No, because the question is only an assumption about the motive why he did it.


Would we judge this case equally if there were no previous 15 pages about Ratimov's case? I believe not and am almost sure there would be no word about negative feedback.


This can be interpreted in different ways, therefore I am of the opinion that it is not enough for red. Signature is payment for some kind of service, or promotion, and if you remove the ad from your sig space, you will not be paid.
In Ratimov's case, he wanted to pay for the improvement of his reputation, but he didn't get it, maybe that's why he doesn't want to pay.

---

If we are already dealing with assumptions, it seems that 1miau got into a similar situation after the drama against him. He previously started several competitions, but he decided to cancel them all. (He also left the signature campaign.)
However, perhaps a different interpretation of the withdrawal of sponsorship by Ratimov influenced him to change his decision once again.

Well, if you weren't mentally problematic, you'd knew you can open a topic on anyone, stop asking stupid questions and get to work, after all this is supposedly your forum or your lover's forum, REAL bitcoin ring a bell?

I don't know what's going on here. So I had to read the whole thread

I read the whole thread first. I realized that one user is being blamed here. I looked through all the forum logs. And I have a question.

Why did you decide to accuse him only now? I see from old posts that many people have complained about him before, but you didn’t pay attention to the complaints of small users. You yourself confirm this in this topic that many users complained about him. But I also see that during this period many of you, the accusers present here, praised and admired this guy. How is this possible? If he's a bad guy, how could you admire him while others was complained and suffered from about him?

I have nothing against the accused guy in this topic. I have a misunderstanding of your trust system. How can you praise and put on a pedestal someone who initially, according to your words here, had bad intentions? It turns out that you are all abusers too

So my second question arises. Can I open the same topic about nutildah? I don't want to wait until nutildah gets kicked out of the DT.

Otherwise I’m afraid that when the hunt for nutildah begins, someone will get ahead of me and open a topic about him first. I want to be the first accuser of nutildah, just like he was first accuser of BSV

A lot of people see this forum as a place to make money or conduct business deals and I don’t really see anything wrong with it. Raising an account just for this purpose doesn’t seem wrong to me too. In the end he didn’t get them many merits for nothing, he actually added value to the community.

The main thing is symmetrick isn’t a professional businessman as we have seen lately. Deleting topics, posts, trust ratings, canceling rewards etc all of those are unprofessional actions.

I said that before, he had many chances to get out of this mess with little or no damage but well, being unprofessional does this to you. He has the smarts to get to the top but he failed to preserve his situation which happens to many people every day.

Sometimes staying in the game is better than being fast and furious.

Ask Jesse Livermore if you can.

This is one more evidence for those which still prefer to keep their eyes "wide shut" regarding Ratimov Symmetrick: everything this individual did on this forum was for increasing (or protecting) his reputation. He never did anything from good Samaritan spirit.

- He plagiarized and copy-pasted tons of materials, to win merits and show what-a-good-contributor-he is; built his entire pedestal on fooling forum users to merit him.
- He showered in merit his entire army of minions, in order to have them worshipping him about what-a-good-contributor-he is.
- He extorted those stating the truth about him to retract their feedbacks / words, in order to keep looking like he has a immaculate reputation here.
- He sponsored some giveaways to show what-a-nice-guy-he is -- while all these were, in fact, more maneuvers for earning merits / trust.

And now, after being exposed with all his shenanigans, which I'll repeat here:


-- after all these, he also cancel this sponsorship for Halab's contest.

I may be wrong, but it may look like he's trying to sell his account and leave it as clean as possible for the buyer and also debt-free. If a buywer would be interested in this account, he would not like the fact he'd had to pay 1600$ for a contest, right?

Or, in case he is not trying to sell the account the second thing that comes up is that he's acting like doing all he is able to do in order to receive some negative feedbacks.

---

Meanwhile, Ratimov Symmetrick's DT strength reached a new record, being now -11.
Last week 2 more users added him to their distrust list (yahoo and Husires) and 3 more stopped trusting him (Charles-Tim, SatoPrincess and Smartprofit). Thank you for involving in this!

If last week the number of those trusting him was equal to the number of those distrusting him, right now, the number of the lattest became bigger: 50 users distrust him and 46 trust him. Ratimov Symmetrick's boat is sinking more and more as time passes.

From those 46 trusting him, only 27 are still active (or were active somehow recently), so there are still chances for these users to change their mind as well: Zilon, _BlackStar, Shamm, KingsDen, Silence Scream, Jossque, Coin-1, Julien_Olynpic, sky999, bubbalex, madnessteat, Snork1979, FontSeli, YOSHIE, ajanwalker, Gianluca95, rby, nimogsm, my luck, FutureBitcoin, Wapfika, dimonstration, whyrqa, CarnagexD, imhoneer, Best_Change, KTChampions.

All of the above should bear in mind (besides the already exposed shenanigans done by Ratimov Symmetrick) the fact that now they are trusting a user which has no feedback left, thus their Trust inclusion is for nothing.

As LV already emphasized twice, there is no reason to add someone in your Trust list since that user left no feedback. Practically you are supposed to trust someone's judgement from the left feedbacks, while this individual has no feedback left:

One could argue the 3 future winners of the contest will be harmed. I guess it'll be up to them to create an accusation, but in my opinion that will look greedy.

It wasn't really a trade. I've had a (back then reputable) online casino offer me a monthly sponsor deal for loyce.club. After the first month, they didn't keep their promises anymore. By now that account turned into an exit scam, but at the time it didn't seem like a good reason for a scam accusation. I lost nothing from breaking a promise to something I never had.

He basically bought some temporary reputation without paying for it when he decided his reputation isn't worth the money anymore.

That's a good point. Ratimov's post was only #11 in the thread, which means most participants posted after his pledge to increase the prize money by ~10 fold.

A few Newbies tried this with a (small) giveaway, then earned Merit, and didn't pay. That's why now most users stopped giving Merit to Newbie giveaway threads, but reputable members still get Merited when they do this. After all, those posts are worth reading.

I can only express my opinion. The man promised, the man did not fulfill the promise. It is customary among gentlemen to keep promises. The motives are no longer so interesting.




How then can you make deals if he can stop keeping his word at any moment?
What if you send him money as a loan, but he suddenly needs it urgently and he doesn’t return it to you? will you think the same way?


he was deanomized back in December 2019, or rather, it was his personal mistake, because he began his career on the forum under his real name.
he was so stupid that his personal photos from social networks, advertisements from dating sites, advertisements from the sale of car spare parts, his mobile phone number was seen by many people from the Russian locale. he kept it all in the public domain.

Does his recent behavior means that it is risky to do business with him? I guess the answer is cristal clear, just yes.

If reds are left when an auction is not fulfilled by the vendor/buyer, we should probably leave a red for cancelling a "sponsorship".
IMO the main idea is the same in both cases: it is risky to make a deal with this them, they don't respect their promises.