Topic: Support my flag against Nekoma2018 (Read 294 times)
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Well this wasn't your average bounty campaign, it was a paid bitcoin campaign. The manager to my understanding have been employed as a part of the team. It started as a BM job but from his comments he's now a part of the team. The project is originated from Korea and they have physical casinos so were just trying to get online audience for their online casino. Understandable the BM is now in charge of all english activities and further campaigns are to be launch soon which he'll also be in charge of. Therefore to my understanding he's now like an english representative of the project.
Since I have gotten enough support, topic will be locked now. If you have any other information that say otherwise feel free to PM and I'll unlock the topic for more debate.
The thing is neither the project or BM are concerned about the tagged. They have indicated that numerous times and have taken their final decision. It make no sense we debating about an issue when the affected parties aren't showing any concern.
There is lack of evidence here about the bounty manager having any other benefits from the project aside of the bounty payments he received for his management work. I agree bounty manager should have not supported the cancelation of the bounty payments, but thats not even important as he was not holding the bounty tokens and there is not much he could do, as the teams decision matters here.
I would not support your flag for now, until there is evidence of this as @mikeywith stated.
I would not support your flag for now, until there is evidence of this as @mikeywith stated.
I need to see the evidence that show his involvement in this "scam" aside from being the campaign manager.
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
@mikeywith, As the image shows the user CHUDI did point out to the BM that when he comes out openly to support the decision of the team not to pay the participants when he did approved the removal of signature that does send a wrong signal to the community. And before that user must have suggested that to the BM, it means the BM must had showed support for the team's decision. Like I say some message have already been deleted so I can't get the whole message. Due to insults and messages they consider to be fud starting popping up in the group the BM did delete some messages so I hope you don't mind joining the group to ask questions and possibly get answers you need to convince you. Here's the group link: https://t.me/AnyoneLTD
There are thousands of messages and I can't scroll through all to give you want you want, you can verify all the information you want from the group (it's somehow active so won't take you time to get answers and leave the group)
There are thousands of messages and I can't scroll through all to give you want you want, you can verify all the information you want from the group (it's somehow active so won't take you time to get answers and leave the group)
this image below will give you an idea of what happened that resulted to my tag on his account.
With all due respect this image does not show anything that proves the statement I quoted in my previous reply, what needs to be proven here is that the campaign manager Nekoma2018 supported the decision of the "boss" and asked all participants who haven't get paid to f*** off instead of supporting them.
I do trust you way more than I would trust Nekoma2018 but I need to see the evidence that show his involvement in this "scam" aside from being the campaign manager.
Flag supported on Anyone but I also cannot determine yet if he was really part of the decision to reject participants who removed signature. I find the image of the chat you posted inconclusive. What were the replies to your comments?
This Nekoma2018 is another bounty hunter turned bounty manager in an instant. Someone hired by a team to save cost. A push over.
This Nekoma2018 is another bounty hunter turned bounty manager in an instant. Someone hired by a team to save cost. A push over.
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
@mikeywith, just did a quick search via the "boss words" on the telegram group since that word was used in the group mostly when the final decision came in. I left the groupchat same day this thread was created as I saw no benefits of staying in the group as they have decided not pay as indicated above. I notice some earlier comments have been deleted but this image below will give you an idea of what happened that resulted to my tag on his account.
If you have been following the scam accusation you would notice at first, I opposed the suggestion of a tag on his account but after observing the follow up comments from the BM the whole issue just looked staged to me.
Neither the team or BM are concerned about the tag on their account (they have indicated that numerous times on the groupchat) that's also why, they haven't made any statement to defend themselves on any of the accusation thread although they're all aware of the scam accusation against them.
If you have been following the scam accusation you would notice at first, I opposed the suggestion of a tag on his account but after observing the follow up comments from the BM the whole issue just looked staged to me.
Neither the team or BM are concerned about the tag on their account (they have indicated that numerous times on the groupchat) that's also why, they haven't made any statement to defend themselves on any of the accusation thread although they're all aware of the scam accusation against them.
You see the flag against Nekoma2018 is subjective, I of course went through all the details you provided and I did support your flag against ANYONE project account because it makes every sense to do so.
Now Nekoma2018 being the campaign manager who does not have access to the campaign funds, is not capable of scamming anyone to begin with , so this is really confusing to be honest.
Does the community think that the campaign manager MUST secure the funds before starting the campaign? I think other campaign managers would have a more accurate saying on this matter,
If that is the case then Nekoma2018 is guilty, if however campaign mangers are not obligated to secure the payment upfront then Nekoma2018 is not guilty per se , however this statement of yours makes all the difference.
While some people might find him innocent and not to be held responsible for the dev team's actions, his moral duty is to support the participants who deserve to be paid and not turn his back on them , if you could prove the claim I quoted, you will have my support, not that my support matters that much but I am certain that some other people might be thinking the same and that's the reason why you haven't gotten enough support for this flag yet.
Now Nekoma2018 being the campaign manager who does not have access to the campaign funds, is not capable of scamming anyone to begin with , so this is really confusing to be honest.
Does the community think that the campaign manager MUST secure the funds before starting the campaign? I think other campaign managers would have a more accurate saying on this matter,
If that is the case then Nekoma2018 is guilty, if however campaign mangers are not obligated to secure the payment upfront then Nekoma2018 is not guilty per se , however this statement of yours makes all the difference.
Quote
The team have refused to pay the participants and he has admitted to support the decision from the team.
While some people might find him innocent and not to be held responsible for the dev team's actions, his moral duty is to support the participants who deserve to be paid and not turn his back on them , if you could prove the claim I quoted, you will have my support, not that my support matters that much but I am certain that some other people might be thinking the same and that's the reason why you haven't gotten enough support for this flag yet.
Quick question: why isn't there a notification feature to all DT members each time a flag is created so we don't have to beg for support here and there. This notification can be in the form of a pop up message so they can be alerted about the flag and decide whether to support it or not based on the available information.
On average, 10 flags are created each day. Sending a popup message to 500 users would be terribly annoying. Supporting a flag means spending enough time to really know the details of what you're supporting, and for that reason, I've only supported a few so far.My Flag viewer will be online again soon
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
They already have an advantage and a responsibility, the message would just serve as a reminder and maybe make their job a little bit easier beside when it come to issue regarding the forum, I prefer getting my information from the forum even when 3rd parties are involved. I'm sure others might feel the same way maybe that's why they haven't used the service you highlighted.
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 3878
Hire Bitcointalk Camp. Manager @ r7promotions.com
Quick question: why isn't there a notification feature to all DT members each time a flag is created so we don't have to beg for support here and there so they can be alerted about the flag and decide whether to support or not based on the available information.
I think the forum does not want to give DT or any specific group of people any extra advantage. The forum features are distributed by forum rank. DT is a community choice. You have given a privilege only.Anyway, I think anyone who is actively looking for supporting or opposing flags, they can just follow the list LoyceV hosted in his server. I guess this serves your purpose.
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
My flag against the user isn't getting enough support to make the flag active and my other attempts to make the flag visible haven't been successful. Here's a full details
And here's the reason I want the user flagged,
Based on the statement from @Nekoma2018 on the groupchat, i have come to a conclusion that, he was an accomplice of the deliberate attempt by the team not to pay the participants. First he approved removal of signature after the team have delayed payment of participants so they could disqualify as much participants as possible and denial them payment after successfully promoting project for two weeks. The team have refused to pay the participants and he has admitted to support the decision from the team.
Support my flag on his account: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=592
Thank you.
Quick question: why isn't there a notification feature to all DT members each time a flag is created so we don't have to beg for support here and there. This notification can be in the form of a pop up message so they can be alerted about the flag and decide whether to support it or not based on the available information. Just saying.
And here's the reason I want the user flagged,
Is Nekoma2018 the one who said signatures can be removed? This would be a good reason for a Type 2 or even Type 3 flag.
Based on the statement from @Nekoma2018 on the groupchat, i have come to a conclusion that, he was an accomplice of the deliberate attempt by the team not to pay the participants. First he approved removal of signature after the team have delayed payment of participants so they could disqualify as much participants as possible and denial them payment after successfully promoting project for two weeks. The team have refused to pay the participants and he has admitted to support the decision from the team.
Support my flag on his account: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=592
Thank you.
Quick question: why isn't there a notification feature to all DT members each time a flag is created so we don't have to beg for support here and there. This notification can be in the form of a pop up message so they can be alerted about the flag and decide whether to support it or not based on the available information. Just saying.
Jump to: