Topic: Sig campaign mangers - now help advertising for scammers - TO PROTECT THE BOARD. (Read 715 times)

None of the above users actually work for YoBit, they promote some forum, and payment is made via YoBit. It's no secret what this is really about, YoBit finds a way to get on bitcointalk again by hiding behind the forum, and by hiring a respected member of this community to work on checking the quality of posts/users.

 

Comments by five other Cryptotalk participants about Yobit:

Wait, wasn't there someone who specifically wanted to join a sig campaign to promote a scam in order to recoup money lost to said scam? I wonder which campaign that person might be in currently.

Some people tend to have cookie-dough morals when it comes to money.

There's no doubt about yobit being a shady exchange with all those ponzi coins and fake pumps.
No doubt they are promoting yobit exchange with cryptotalk signature. Cryptotalk signature rewards goes to yobit balance.
They did this just because Yobit signature was banned on this forum.

But personally I think the forum should not enforce anything. As you set up more and more rules, they'd turn ambiguous.

I am not quite sure how I have seen cryptotalk's signature, it is probably because MFahad has cryptotalk's signature, and, while writing and editing post many times I simple forget that it was MFahad who wears it and you have wolfbet's one  

Actually, the same question applies to some other users wearing cryptotalk's signature:












This person even claims they are victim:




How about that.

Your voice of course does not matter. Simply because you are an imbecile. You are also a pajeet that will say, do or promote anything for some small fragment of btc dust.

Now have another read you blathering dreg and understand that I am clearly telling you that what yobit has done is clearly a blatant theft of peoples wealth.
They turned off withdrawals of sys so you could not withdraw them before the update to v4. Sys devs asked them repeatedly to switch it back on. There was no issue with the wallet and bittrex was running it fine as were every other exchange. Since yobit has a strong reputation for switching off withdrawals for YEARS people immediately panic and dump it down to silly prices just to get out AT ALL. This is creating their own markets where coins are still trading there for 50% or 20% they do on other exchanges. Can you imagine what an exchange can do when their markets are still trading but at such a lower price?? that is not even considering the immediate theft of peoples coins or the huge losses people are forced to take just to get ANYTHING BACK for coins?  CBX was another very old and stable pos project at the time, this wallet was switched off one day, the devs asked why? NO ANSWER, the devs kept asking for years NO ANSWER the wallet is fine on the other exchanges like cryptopia (until they decided to close keeping everyones coins). This is pure theft.  Now keep reading until it penetrates your incredibly dense skull.


@welch

I am not sure if you are just kidding around. How can the devs, other exchanges and every other user be using the wallets just fine and confirm NO ISSUES, but yobit turns off the wallet for months or years with no replies to the devs or customers? you can confirm this by asking the sys dev teams or the cbx dev teams and their communities. There are many more that have suffered this at yobit but those are 2 off the top of our head. USER ERROR you say? how would that work? I mean just explain how user error could account for this? do you mean to suggest the improbable scenario where the dev teams, the other exchanges, the entire community are making a user error in running the wallets okay themselves? and that yobit is the only one that is not making the error by turning the wallet off and cancelling withdrawals ........because....err well nobody knows why because they don't reply.

The only USER ERROR is using yobit and believing you will be treated as you should be by an exchange that is credible and not deserving of a huge warning. How about I tell you after seeing the note from your bank " sorry we are keeping your money, you can switch your balance out to another bank but you just get 10c on the dollar" i'll come to your bank with you to confirm...and they say the same thing, when we ask why?... they just walk off and won't answer?

You look at me and say, see these thieves are just taking my money away, it's been like this for a year..fucking scammers. I say to you, in cases like these it is generally user error? you look confused and start to imagine how fun it would be to dragon-punch me there and then.

If you are really interested ask the sys coin dev team, ask the community, or go buy some sys coins at bittrex and transfer them to yobit and then try to extract them again. Well DONT do that actually because you will lose all of your funds for several reasons.

I had a message once from a proud owner of lots of shiny new coins who had just had his long term order at  yobit filled for only 50% of the cost he was buying them on bittrex. By the time I had read this message the next message was far less enthusiastic ..........it went along the lines, ...those fuckers have switched off the withdrawals is it true they do this for sometimes years dude?.  The next message from him was something like .... " fuck it I had to dump it at just above half I got it for because I think it's the only way to recoup anything from that now, never using that place again once I get my funds off of there I suggest you do the same"

Trading is not the easiest thing in the world for some even when you given a fair chance in terms of trading on the exchange. When you throw this into the mix then it is just rough on a lot of people. Needs to be prevented really. Play fair or be branded with a warning.. No ifs buts or maybes because you are getting paid. Zero tolerance.

Same rules for all.

I definitely agree with some of your points, however like Hilarious states within his message these complaints could be the user at fault rather than Yobit. I'm not trying to defend Yobit whatsoever, but I am trying to consider all angles on the limited knowledge I have. We don't know if the error of these wallets was because of something the user did rather than Yobit actually seizing the coins. Users run to the forums, and claim they scammed them when it could possibly be them at fault. For example, breaking rules or whatever. That's just an example. Again, I'm not going to claim that I'm knowledgeable in this drama with Yobit as I've been to busy recently to actually look into it. However, from the posts that I have seen there's been mixed feedback, and those that are claiming Yobit to be at fault haven't provided any evidence to make me believe that.  Of course, if you'd like to enlighten me about any solid evidence that these claims are true then I'd definitely take a look.

Okay I respect your position on this and I would I like my voice to be heard. I know, it does not matter much but still.

Yobit, so far according to my knowledge has not scammed any user. It has listed shit projects, it has shilled its investbox without much mettle to it, but none of it actually accounts as something that is worthy of being tagged as a scam.

On top of that, everyone that has a functioning brain knows this that Yobit is promoting its own forum and in turn its own exchange through this campaign. We all get it. But what I don't understand is why a blanket tag to everyone, especially for people that are responsibly participating in this campaign 'the right thing to do'?

Please keep in mind, that you are someone I respect because you have a clear stance on things and are logical when you draw your conclusions. So please help me see things the way you see it.

Double standards is the main issue. Lets bann all the double standards people.


Of course not. The fact that this is forum is full of information, its going to be busy even without signatures. But that wouldn't be business wise.

@actmyname

It is our personal opinion that any member/org/corp found to be scamming should also have a warning placed on any future project from them regardless of whether it is "currently " scamming or not. That would seem only prudent.

Either way, this should be set in stone and made into a part of the transparent rules that all members/projects are measured against. No room for saying well they will pay us so lets wait for proof or hmmm they are competition to our sponsors lets not wait for proof this time. NO that is bogus.

You can't just keep switching and changing... oh we need to wait for PROOF... no we can't wait for proof because it is too late...

I say the only way is to wait for PROOF, but yes for some by then it will be too late.  However, you need to consider, shooting early on a hunch, could result in many innocent people taken out . I would personally see the greedy and high risk gamblers burned before innocent people for something they have not done nor intended to do.

In life people who want to believe they can get 500% returns with no risk need to wake up, if you are going to send your magic internets money to people, do some deep personal research, or don't cry when it does a vanishing act.


@welch

I do not think if you are scamming 1% or 5% or 0.1% of your client base you can rely on volume or the good reports from those you are not currently scamming to protect you from a warning sign here. If you are running a large scheme you only need to thieve from 1% to make yourself very wealthy. If there is evidence you have scammed even one person and do not make it right you are a scammer and need a warning.

If your bank suspended your account forever with your money there and said you can switch your balance another bank to withdraw but only at 10c on the dollar rate. We think you may class this as stealing or scamming. I don't think you will be saying look at all the other happy customers and look how big that bank is... they must be sort of okay else more would be freaking out. People only mostly care about themselves really. If they are okay fuck the poor guy that got scammed that;s their tough shit.

There is no reason to take wallets offline that are working and refuse to put them back online after years of being asked nicely by the dev team. Those wallets are functioning fine for everyone else.

Yobit is certainly worthy of a warning tag, there is in our opinion no way one can justify sending people to their services without warning they could have their coins detained for no reason for years and perhaps for good.

To be honest it is not yobit per say that is the issue or their forum. It is the double standards. Some people are given scam tags by DT members for advertising projects that DT members may perhaps turn into a scam.

The double standards here is MAIN ISSUE. It seems that you need no proof of scam for projects that are not paying campaign managers or DT members are promoting them. Suddenly you need undeniable proof if they are being paid. This is wrong. There needs to be a set standard for ALL members and ALL projects regardless of whether certain people here can squeeze some money out of it.

Transparent rules ensuring equal treatment of all members/projects.

Sure yobit are not THE WORST and they could fix their shit. They need to get on with it, but it will not save those that have dumped out at huge losses when they need not have done if yobit had not just taken the wallets off line or turned off withdrawals.

POLONIEX are also guilty of doing this on a bit of smaller scale. I hope those get busted for this too. However, they seem to have opened the coins for withdrawal NOW that they are worth 1% of what they were when they turned it off. That coin had a fully functioning wallet and bitrex was running theirs fine. That is a scum bag move. This is not a couple of weeks, this is a year or more.

Anyway just get up some transparent rules and stick to them. No swapping around.

This already gives plenty of ammo for others here who will start claiming "proof or double standards". Also the can of worms ...can a project that scammed start a new project without that project having a warning. This is why the environment here will always be suboptimal. People simply do not like to see double standards enforced on them.

Best to draw a line in the sand and that is that with financially dangerous members or projects. Zero tolerance. Sadly since many DT members are scammers or scammer supporters that line will not be drawn by them. (not all, but even those that just want to stay out of it are too weak for DT positions, you need people that will do the right thing however unpopular you will become)


This will be our last post here on the yobit/CT thing since they are not a prime concern to us and can't spend too much time on that. We are primarily interested in pushing for transparent fair standards that is it. They are not the worst here and therefore unfair to use them too much to highlight the need for fair consistent action. Unless people believe they see reasons to disagree with our points.


 

I'm not going to get into a debate over Yobit here as you rightly said I'm not that informed about the taking down of wallets. I know there's been a lot of complaints about support over the years, and that its pretty much non existent. However, this signature campaign is related to their forum, and as long as they're paying their campaign members then there can't be too many complaints. If they were advertising their exchange I can imagine there would be far more users knocking at the door with their pitchforks, and I would hope there wasn't too many users willing to advertise their exchange, because of the recent history. Maybe, once they've proven, and resolved some of the complaints against them in a few years they'll be looked at favorably, but at the moment they are very much branded as the "shady" exchange. This kind of makes one believe that they aren't outright a scam, but possibly have bad support when things do go wrong. Again, I'm not too familiar with the situation, but that's my outsider sort of view with reading information here, and there  since I haven't really been actively keeping up with the whole drama revolving around Yobit, and its exchange.

Despite the many complaints that exist on this forum there seems to be a lot of users claiming to have positive experiences including some reputable users. So, without actually using the exchange its hard to make a decision on whether their exchange is outright a scam, because they currently have a lot of users, and one hell of a trade volume. Surely, if they were outright a scam no one would want to use them.

I have a similar sort of viewpoint to Hilarious' post here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52624469


Just because I know forum policy, doesn't mean I am invested in Altcoins. There's a key difference in being able to delete spam, move topics, and being invested in altcoins. Am I interested in altcoins? A few pique my interest, but more to see where they go technologically rather than being invested in them.

This campaign is being watched by a lot of users including the admins. If it becomes a problem then you can bet your buck that another ban will be coming their way.

Signature campaigns definitely don't keep this forum alive, and some might argue are slowly killing the forum. I think there's a way to get them to work without damaging the forum, but that would require a lot of restrictions.

I was very careful with my choice of words as i used the word shady which to my understanding means dishonest, untrustworthy etc. Can an exchange be shady and not be a scam?, Probably yes to some extent e.g mercatox exchange could be considered one of those. We have different references and accusation threads that point towards yobit exchange been shady. It's not in my power to declare them scam besides since the forum doesn't moderate scams guess there's no point debating on this issue.

Mostly what the forum is after is moderating the rate at which spam is been produced on the forum which signature campaign is a major contributor to. The involvement of a manager has minimize that problem to some extent guess that's why the adminstrators of the forum haven't taken action.

People in this forumboard is partying everyday, the signature campaigns makes it alive and running. The opportunity of this board is limitless. If it dies signature advertisers will look for new traffic sources and they will move on to other crypto forums like cryptotalk.

I don't like YoBit and I don't like this campaign. In fact, I detest it. The 'solution' of using a campaign manager is merely a fragment of what I would have wanted - the eradication of the campaign.

There is a question to be asked, though... Is CryptoTalk a scam?

Once you have your answer, consider this: this may be a proxy for YoBit to shill their site in the future, that is, a way of bypassing the previous signature ban on the YoBit site directly.

Then finally: if you were to red tag YoBit participants, should you also tag CryptoTalk participants based on this speculation?

Not trying to defend any project here, just airing my views. We both have different opinions and since there isn't any concrete evidence to back any of us up, we might both be right or wrong. I'm not getting paid by either yobit or cryptotalk so don't understand where you assumption is coming from but well, if you think because when you mention cryptotalk, discussion about yobit pops up and since everything concerning the signature campaign has to do with yobit then they most be connected, I can't argue with you that's your reasoning.

But understand this, exchanges offering their platform for IEO gets the same benefits yobit is currently recieving, that doesn't make the exchange the owners of the IEO projects. I understand it to be an indirect marketing strategy. Everything about an IEO takes place on an exchange and promotes that host exchange just as currently everything about cryptotalk signature campaign promote yobit but technically that doesn't make Cryptotalk = yobit just as IEO project aren't owned by the host exchanges. Correct me rightly if you feel I'm wrong, some of us are willing to learn.

What???

Yobit HAS for years taken wallets down of fully functioning coins, for years ignored developers requests to put them back online, deliberately not updated to new forks. I mean if you turn markets withdrawals off the markets panic and immediately dump leaving your coins there trapped. WTF are you talking about NOT proven they scammed anyone. You can not do this to traders. This is completely out of control. This is not tiny projects either. SYS coin was not even updated it was a top 50 project at the time and they did not update leaving peoples coins trapped there on the old chain and unable to be withdrawn or swapped. Same for several projects.  This is perhaps not a deception ie scam (we think there is sensible expectation exchanges do not do this as commmon practice.). It is more like PURE THEFT.

This is likely more dangerous than 99% of the 2 bit scammers DT run around trying to pretend to stop.

" I have not used yobit and do not use alt coins" ... which section do you moderate??

Please stick to commenting on the things you have experience with. Or you are publishing misleading information.

Yobit are not exit scamming yet or denying btc withdrawals etc but they can not be allowed to switch wallets off for years on end and leave them off for no good reason. Imagine your bank just said sorry no withdrawals now, you can switch you balances to another bank and withdraw but you only get 10% on the dollar if you do this. LOL totally not a a scam.

Like others said there's no active scam accusation against Yobit. They have made bad decisions in past advertising campaigns on this forum, and have paid the price. However, they have made the step in the right direction, and those that are claiming "Yobit does what it wants" obviously isn't true if they've resorted to using a campaign manager, and a reputable at that. It was obvious that they tried to save as much money as possible, and thought they could brute force their way into Bitcointalk. Which obviously didn't work out for them, and in return they had their signature banned from the forum.

Even if you were to judge Cryptotalk based on the existing reputation of Yobit. It hasn't been confirmed that they have scammed anyone, and the only real criticism you can say about them is regarding the whole Yobit spam, but they're at least making steps in the right direction. I haven't used Yobit, because I don't really have a need for an exchange, and I don't deal in altcoins. However, if I ever did I'd probably remember them just from the shenanigans that have happened. Would I like them to make a little more effort, and place more restrictions on who can enter into their campaign? Yes, probably. However, at the moment I haven't seen too many spammers on the Yobit signature campaign, and for those that are will hopefully be removed shortly by Yahoo. Despite their history on the forum, everyone knows about them, and with an effective strategy for the existing campaign every new comer into Bitcoin will likely hear about them. I wouldn't be surprised if they're the go to option in the future just because of the amount of exposure they seem to be able to get.

Why do you think yobit is shady exchange?

From the look of things, it seems cryptotalk is yobit's forum. Do you think your opinion is right and my is wrong, and I think you are receiving money from something you just called shady and you think you are not receiving money from them, even thought you are?

It is all part of marketing, everyone talks about yobit, when you see cryptotalk, you think of yobit, when 400 users joined signature campaign they joined yobit, when users at cryptotalk get their payed-to-post rewards, where they will receive them? When CH started this thread, she didn't mention yobit, yahoo or cryptotalk - you came to this conclusion by yourself, and you started "yobit this, cryptotalk that, yahoo this". Mission accomplished, as I said, it is all part of marketing.


Tell me, why would this cryptotalk promoter complain about yobit in cryptotalk-signature-campaign thread:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52602570
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.52614520


Well, yes, you get it right, no one promotes exchange in signature  

Wrong

There can be NO promoting of scams or scammers.

There is ONLY one way to operate as I have just said. You need to decide if something meets the transparent clear threshold of scamming or scammer, then red trust ANYONE that promotes it or advertises it. Those can be removed once they understand or come to learn the error of their ways. Sig bans are suitable for those that wish to continue advertising after they have been told.

As if SPAM even comes close to SCAM in terms of endangering members here.

This we must worry about spam to the point of helping to advertise SCAM FOR PAY is totally bogus.

IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT

1. yobit is a scam
or
2  Yobit is cryptotalk

that is a different matter.

If you believe though that either are true or highly PROBABLE then you should be red trusting any person promoting them or advertising them.

THIS bogus crap we must help fight SPAM whilst helping promote SCAMS is laughable.

DOUBLE STANDARDS

ELSE

Any other scams must be treated in the same way. yahoo or hhampuz must manage them (because apparently they are the "best" people for the job although they just rely mostly on the gamed and manipulated metrics that the broken systems of control fart out) and people pushing scams will not get red trust or have any action taken against them IF THEY DO NOT SPAM.

Haha sorry that repeating THIS TRUTH is more upsetting to you at this point that scams being advertised by your buddies. Please stop the spam of truth whilst people profit from assisting the advertising of scams. In the name of PROTECTION.

Stopping PURE SPAMMERS AND SHITPOSTERS advertising it does NOTHING to protect the members from getting SCAMMED. Actually one could possibly say that if you restricted advertising of scams to "the most trusted" "the most merited" then you would be ensuring greater success of the scams because people would have MORE faith in those promoting the said scams LOL

Quick protect us more.

As previously stated if we are going to WAIT for PROOF cryptotalk is yobit that is different. Then this must be the standard for all new POSSIBLE or PROBABLE scams.
If you are referring (as you did ) to yobit directly)then our point is clear and undeniable.

@assjob

ssshhhh first go out into the real forum and achieve something. Don't waste time trying assist those that are in no need of your help. The one on topic point you made, was already answered and covered. WAIT FOR PROOF with ALL possible scams or scammers OR  NOT.

Of course you may say well a scammer can scam on one project and then start a new project where he has not yet scammed and it must be allowed to proceed without warning? We don't think that should be the case, but again this is a different debate.

Let's establish a standard for ALL projects and ALL members. Not keep swapping the standards depending on if certain people are receiving payment or not.