Topic: This account is not compromised and is not 'abusing the merit system' - page 2. (Read 672 times)

You don't have to have a "solid reason" to change your email address..
An email address change is just a clue that an account may have changed hands but itself in not proof of anything..



You have never posted a single address that you control the keys too? Even an altcoin address? If you could find one and prove you still control it it could go a long way to help you out..

Posting a staked address is not anti-anonymity.. The address can be completely empty and unused, linked to no identity other than your online identity that you would like to secure..

Even a shitcoin address you posted long ago that you can sign? Anything? A PGP public key?


Hell yes, everyone should post a staked address. The earlier the better.. Newbies should post staked addresses..
Don't you see how many accusations of account hacks and actual account hacks happen around here?
You need a staked address to protect yourself from scammers, and to protect the forum from scammers..

You can also use it to prove your identity between different platforms... So if you are on telegram or some other forum you can PROVE that you are THE REAL lin0sspice and not an impostor.. Impostors happen ALL THE TIME..

Edit
See...


If this is true then this could have been stopped a long time ago, if the guy had a staked address to PROVE it..
But he didn't I guess?
The post is not very convincing to be honest, but it would be 100% PROOF if he would just have had a staked address..

Shame..
Have a staked address people!!

There are also reports that this account was compromised back in 2015.  see Page 230

You merited a bunch of shitposts. You're literally encouraging rule-breaking posts, even if we ignore the fact that those accounts mysteriously woke up to bump your thread. You're also breaking the rules yourself, even in this thread.

And yes, a 300-page thread being bumped with said shitposts is very likely employing people (or bots) to do that. You can quit this righteous indignation drama, it's not working.

So, you have merited 11 people (8/9 of which have just woke up) in the span of 4 minutes...hmm i wonder why it took you 9 months to give your first merit?...to posts like this:

You never took it off

Which part did i miss?
That you have no idea/relation to accounts shilling in your thread?  Ah huh, let me put that blindfold back again.

Do you read or just post with a blindfold?

Looks like mass grave excavation, all these accounts recently woke up from a long 7 month period of inactivity.


OP about to bring back to life 69 more zombies.

edit.

2011 account as well  sareea

@BitProNews I am not here to impress anyone nor am I here to comply with your, non-authoritative demands and judgement, but I will reply to you anyway because I find some amusement out it.

I'm sorry, changing the email to the official project email ([email protected]) is not a valid reason? Better yet, why do I have to give you reasoning after a full year of running the VLX project for changing to the project email?

Be sure that you don't understand well the merit system even you are here since a long time.

No, I don't know nor do I really care how the merit system works other than you gave award it to other users for the posts they make, besides that in my eyes it's meaningless. Obviously it is taken a lot more seriously in the eyes of forum fanatics/fanboys, like yourself.

You didn't find any staked address because I never had the need to publicly do business nor enough to show everyone how many bitcoins I have or tie an address to my account. If you can see, my project is about anonymity and decentralization, doing exactly what you just said would almost be a complete contradiction to my beliefs. If you would like me to, I'll post a staked message of an empty address to 'tickle your fancy' when someone throws a compromised account accusation at me in the future.

TDLR that response: I have been running my project for over a year, if my account was "compromised" it would have been labelled as such as soon as we started the project.


Unfortunately for your power hungry ego, your trust rating is meaningless, nor do I really care about it. You can mark me with 100 negative trust ratings if you like, it only makes you look 100x more like a sheep.

Thanks for giving me some fun today, I don't usually post in meta or any forum-politics based boards but this has been enjoyable.

Thanks for putting in the effort to write up this list and if you like I can PM each member to either delete their post on their own accord (if that really is my new responsibility as a project owner) or delete it myself as it is a self moderated thread, if that is what the 'watchdogs' here desire.

We always condone our members to promote and post in our communities, as you can see by the thousands of responses, but that does not mean we employ people to post. We incentivize them to, to support the project, but we do not condone any rule breaking.

If you want to believe that we employ people to post, on a thread with already over 5000 responses over the last year, I can't contest that...though in my eyes it's extremely illogical, and purely looking for any reason to keep the red trust there.

If people use multiple accounts, unfortunately as a project owner & representative for a 1+year old project I can't and don't have the time to control that, but again this does not make me or my project untrustworthy, it makes the users untrustworthy. They should be the ones with the rating or warning or whatever is aimed to achieve by painting someone untrustworthy for such a reason.

Yes and my comment still stands, this is more about the reasoning and actual ruling behind the rating rather than the actual rating. It honestly does not effect the project in the slightest, the community is there and knows what we can achieve, but that does not mean that I do not want to know the reasoning or logic behind the entire reason. I don't know what you tried to achieve with this post, but you look (kind of) like an idiot if you're trying to prove something.

Let's not be naive here. What it looks like to me is those accounts have been employed by you to bump your thread with fake volume/comments. Is it a coincidence that all the accounts of that page look to be hacked?

These accounts below are just from the last three pages of your thread and have all recently had their details reset and have woken up from a long period of activity:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/tulpa-220679     Tulpa
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/dark143i-165124     dark143i
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/speedracerrick69-29369 speedracerrick69
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/arrogance-72232     Arrogance
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/hobo-25401     hobo
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/eirecoin-314785 Eirecoin
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/bnjmnkent-102512     bnjmnkent
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/macioman-199385     macioman
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/missworld-162055 missworld
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/dioncodot-209858     dioncodot
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/alkuluku-119698     alkuluku
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/donaldnorman-27535     Donald_Norman
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/weirdthall-82082     weirdthall
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/catcoinminer-205508 catcoinminer
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/cesar22-170247 Cesar22
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/cryptzilla-298495 cryptzilla
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/glenntalbot-313787 glenntalbot
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/sareea-29204 sareea
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/hany103-115980 hany103
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/slap666-136849 slap666
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/hffule-138155 hffule
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/ibisy70-25406 ibisy70
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/d-leit-495378 d-leit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/sunnyxiong-316024 sunnyxiong
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/screenman-218747 screenman
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/agf-246731 agf
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/quentinn-137126 quentinn
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/alquinte-198543 alquinte
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/sasha00-394451 Sasha00
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/xtremist-132669 Xtremist
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/ivann-98101 ivann

This is what you said in another thread:
https://archive.fo/ZYgLd

I can deny it, and I am sure many others will to. This rule was quite literally implemented two days ago, there is no clear ruling as to how it works and for awarding those who contribute to the projects thread does not make me untrustworthy.

Should this not be the responsibility of the user posting? I put no more thought than "This user posted a comment about the project, I see the new merit rule, I will give him a merit as a thank you for posting" ...
Is it now my responsibility to take my time away from my projects development to cater for other members, and if I don't do so, I am deemed untrustworthy?
That sounds a little absurd and tedious especially for a project owner, don't you think?

Sure, if that's a rule, I will not continue to do so purely for the sake of the project, but from my own personal view I think this is now more than absurdity that I now have to review every single member just to make sure I am not punished for them posting in my thread.

Nobody can deny that This is the right judgement.

Here you confirm that your Gmail is not secure enough but this is not a solid reason to change an email you used since 2013 even the account is related to your project.

Merit system had been made to reward good posts and not users neither contributed members of your project. But would you confirm how those posts merit to be awarded? Here some examples of constructive criticism (as you saw it):
     
All the merited posts have no quality and don't even merit to be written.
Check the summury here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=merit;u=183610

Send them back !!
Are you trolling !!!?

Already solved by Red Tagging you  

Be sure that you don't understand well the merit system even you are here since a long time.

---

Suggestion: I didn't find any staked address so please confirm that you are the owner of the account before contacting Lauda, and read about the Merit and new rank requirement before sending merits to your contributors.

Unfortunately for you, you've been meriting those users for "inappropriate" posts, which is why probably everybody would come to the conclusion that it's at least somewhat fishy.

What you should have done, IMHO, is create a new thread for those users, where you require them to explain what kind of contribution they've made, and merited them for those posts. A lot more work, but at the same time visible and understandable for outsiders.

 
You cannot remove merit.
I guess it would be advisable for you to send Lauda a PM, say "sorry" and point her to this thread for explanation.
She might untag you, but that's solely her decision.

My account has been tagged by Lauda, for what I hope is only a misunderstanding:
"It is very likely that the account is compromised and is now abusing the merit system to rank an army up an army of shitposters."

My project has been standing since 2017, and recently I had changed the email from my gmail account over to the official project email for enhanced security, [email protected].

As for the "army of shitposters" this is an extremely bold and ungrounded accusation. Since theymos has introduced the new merit requirement, I have been +meritting members who have contributed to my project thread in one way or another as a way of thank you for constructive criticism, questioning, and overall thread activity.

If this is not allowed, I was not aware and it most definitely was not made clear, and I will remove the merits or request for those users to send them back if it is really something that causes me to be labelled as untrustworthy.

Our project is soon moving to our own forum, so if the trust stays it is honestly not such a big deal...though either way the situation is quite absurd, and I hope that other projects aren't being treated the same way. I have voiced my opinion already to Lauda, and I do believe that this has been no more than a misunderstanding, though at this point I am not too sure considering the nature of other trust ratings against projects I have known and loved since I have joined this forum also made by Lauda and other default trust members.

I hope the matter can be resolved.

Thank you

Edit- in a matter of 1 minute after writing this post, the meta board had 4 topics related to merit bumped. It's clear these rules for merit are not yet completely established. I think these rules should be made extremely clear before people are beginning to be painted untrustworthy with negative trust for awarding contributors to their topics.