I am stating a fact: xtraelv was unable to continue the conversation about specific facts and just ignores my last message in our discussion.
He is also trying to divert the conversation towards discussing the case with Yobit (and members of its signature campaign accused of spam) - which is irrelevant to our topic.
Another fact: chimik can not answer simple questions posed to him in this message.
But he continues to defend the scamer and refusing to acknowledge the fact: Offering "ICO bumping" services, also known as paid shill bumping. This is a highly shady offer which helps generate fake buzz for various projects.
Topic: Total corruption in Russian local [DT involved!] - page 4. (Read 2664 times)
If I interrupt my interaction with users on the basis of suspicion or demand crystal clear purity, I can lose most of the useful content. In life it happens, it seems that I am 100% sure, and then it turns out that I was mistaken. Need proof. How many spam reports did this service receive? No answer. Deadlock ...
Theymos specifically stated that is is not appropriate to neg-trust spammers:
129 users who were wearing a yobit signature and had at least 1 good report against them in the last 14 days are banned for 14 days. All yobit signatures are wiped. Signatures containing "yobit.net" are banned for 60 days.
Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.
Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.
As much as I hate spam and disapprove of account farmers there have been massive changes made to the DT system, trust system and how scammers are flagged.
Theymos made it very clear that he was unhappy about the way the trust system was being used.
I do not view it as appropriate for trust ratings to relate primarily to non-trust matters. By giving someone negative trust, you're basically attaching a note to all of their posts telling people "warning: do not trade with this person!". If we can get DT working well enough, in the future I'd like to prevent guests from even viewing topics by negative-trust users in trust-enabled sections, so you have to ask yourself whether your negative trust would warrant this sort of significant effect.
In particular, in my view:
- Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
- Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid.
- You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
- It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.
I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists.
In particular, in my view:
- Giving negative trust for being an annoying poster is inappropriate, since this has nothing to do with their trustworthiness. If they're disrupting discussion or never adding anything, then that's something for moderators to deal with, and you should report their posts and/or complain in Meta about it.
- Giving negative trust for merit trading and deceptive alt-account use may be appropriate, but you should use a light touch so that people don't feel paranoid.
- You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.
- It is absolutely not appropriate to give someone negative trust because you disagree with them. I'm disappointed in the reaction to this post. Although H8bussesNbicycles is perhaps not particularly trustworthy for other reasons, the reasons many people gave for neg-trusting him are inappropriate. You can argue that what he's advocating is bad on a utilitarian level, but he would disagree, and his advocacy of a certain Trust philosophy doesn't by itself mean that he's an untrustworthy person. DT selection is meant to be affected by user lists, and it is totally legitimate to try to honestly convince other (real) people to use a list more in-line with your views.
I'm not going to blacklist people from DT selection due to not following my views, since a big point of this new system is to get me less involved, but if a culture somewhat compatible with my views does not eventually develop, then I will consider this more freeform DT selection to be a failure, and I'll probably get rid of it in favor of enforcing custom trust lists.
Your explaination about your personal bheviours looks decent to me, I don't think you did something wrong in giving merits to the banned users as it is not displayed clearly on the forum. But there is no explanation about smartman being trustworthy in any sense, if you see he has clearly tried to spam the forum by offering this services.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51458554
Item number 3. It depends on the nature of the content. If there is no spam, plagiarism, deception, this is not a violation. They can be project participants, testing it and asking questions. I can not be sure of this and can not prove otherwise.
The issue of having multiple accounts has been discussed in the Russian section many times. You need to know how these accounts are obtained and how they are used. I was surprised to learn that the user does not receive a negative trust due to the participation of several accounts in different bounty. I asked DT members if it’s enough for a negative trust, user interest in buying or selling an account, or for his loyalty to it? We discussed for a long time, I heard a lot of opinions that to destroy trust based only on this is not correct. Therefore, in this case, if the user claims that his service was used constructively, I will not be able to refute.
If I interrupt my interaction with users on the basis of suspicion or demand crystal clear purity, I can lose most of the useful content. In life it happens, it seems that I am 100% sure, and then it turns out that I was mistaken. Need proof. How many spam reports did this service receive? No answer. Deadlock ...
Your explaination about your personal bheviours looks decent to me, I don't think you did something wrong in giving merits to the banned users as it is not displayed clearly on the forum. But there is no explanation about smartman being trustworthy in any sense, if you see he has clearly tried to spam the forum by offering this services.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
The ratings did all end up being removed, which I'm happy with, and I appreciate the willingness to de-escalate and forgive from the people involved in this case. The fact that this issue came up at all indicates that the trust system isn't working perfectly (and I am considering future system changes), but it's still a good outcome.
Some people were talking about neg-trusting spammers for spamming. This is not appropriate; report the posts, and if that doesn't seem to be working well, come to Meta with specific examples and suggestions.
Logged-out users will now see a warning in trust-enabled sections if more DT members neg-trust the topic starter than positive-trust him.
This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.
This increases the responsibility of DT members not to give negative trust for stupid reasons, but only for things that cause you to believe that the person is a scammer.
Perhaps the guidance from Theymos (The forum administrator) answers your question.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
We had seen lot of negs in the previous days even for the suspicion but offering such kind of services are completely untrustworthy behaviour.
Corruption.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
We had seen lot of negs in the previous days even for the suspicion but offering such kind of services are completely untrustworthy behaviour.
Corruption.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
We had seen lot of negs in the previous days even for the suspicion but offering such kind of services are completely untrustworthy behaviour.
Your explaination about your personal bheviours looks decent to me, I don't think you did something wrong in giving merits to the banned users as it is not displayed clearly on the forum. But there is no explanation about smartman being trustworthy in any sense, if you see he has clearly tried to spam the forum by offering this services.
Quote
REQUIRED POSTING IN ENGLISH THREADS
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
1. Contact me if in your accounts at least half of the posts in English.
2. Posts up from 100 signs.
3. Express an opinion about the project, ask questions. Don't write nonsense.
4. English is not Google translate.
5. You have from 5 accounts.
Is this something thats allowed here ?
I was charged with protecting the service and in the conflict of interest. In this post, KTChampions lied twice. I do not advertise or defend the service.
Ha ha. I'm lying, and you are telling the truth?
Check the facts. Smart man hiring in and offering bump service:
I will completely do (with the command) the required:
- posting messages to thread on btt.
~
- posting messages to thread on btt.
~
Hi guys looking for posters for a project. Write your telegram in pm.
So what exactly is needed? Posts on btt, thread bumping on btt? Writing articles? PM me.
These are facts. And how does Chimik rate them?
chimk (Hero member, DT-1, merit source)
~
I saw that he was hiring in posting service, in good English, with a requirement for the quality of the content (both volume and content). There is no evidence that this is a promotion of scam projects, that the service has been implemented by shitposting-not proven, the existence of the service itself from this post is also in question.
~
I saw that he was hiring in posting service, in good English, with a requirement for the quality of the content (both volume and content). There is no evidence that this is a promotion of scam projects, that the service has been implemented by shitposting-not proven, the existence of the service itself from this post is also in question.
~
This is an obvious defense of the scam that harms the forum with spam and meaningless messages written for one purpose - to bump the project thread.
Chimik defend Smart man and his spam on forum. It is facts.
Chimik, your behavior is not trustworthy obvious, but additionally answer these questions:
Smart man gave explanations
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51411806
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412195
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412275
I read a lot of forum, sometimes it leads to a comparison of suspicious facts, it takes a lot of time. I first responded on June 10, 2019. I studied this case, read the Smart man's answer, read the opinions of other participants in the discussion, and did not see evidence that the Smart man is detrimental to users or the forum. I have stated my position several times. There is not enough evidence of fraud to negatively assess the trust of this user.
It's funny that chimik believes the words of a scamer, not facts. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51411806
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412195
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412275
I read a lot of forum, sometimes it leads to a comparison of suspicious facts, it takes a lot of time. I first responded on June 10, 2019. I studied this case, read the Smart man's answer, read the opinions of other participants in the discussion, and did not see evidence that the Smart man is detrimental to users or the forum. I have stated my position several times. There is not enough evidence of fraud to negatively assess the trust of this user.
And it is very interesting that in the first report, Smart man tells how he collaborated with the scammers Adab, but chimik does not see any problems! Although Smart man writes that they are scamers, he did not warn anyone about this.
I read a lot of forum, sometimes it leads to a comparison of suspicious facts, it takes a lot of time.
~
Other cases involving Smart man, I have not studied.
You are protecting a fraudster but are not able to verify his profile by yourself? I doubt, most likely you know all but continue to protect him.
I can show another lie that the chimik wrote, but I don’t want to give him a chance to go to offtopic.
Therefore, I will wait for an answer to the questions posed.
Hello!
1. I knew that such a day would come, morally I am ready for any checks. I declare: - there are no abuses in my actions.
I have never sold merit.
I have never engaged in the exchange of merit by agreement.
I did not provide benefits in the activities of DT and did not pursue anyone, without good reason.
I did not buy, did not sell, and did not accept as a gift forum accounts.
Accounts created by me, I have no other accounts.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/chimk-1202061
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/chimk1-2252498
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/vpobege-2259013
I can prove that I created the chimk account, for this I need to open some personal data. I am ready to do this in personal correspondence with administrators.
I do not use other accounts.
2. This accusation of Smart man was published 3 times.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5105985.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5105163
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51398628
Smart man gave explanations
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51411806
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412195
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51412275
I read a lot of forum, sometimes it leads to a comparison of suspicious facts, it takes a lot of time. I first responded on June 10, 2019. I studied this case, read the Smart man's answer, read the opinions of other participants in the discussion, and did not see evidence that the Smart man is detrimental to users or the forum. I have stated my position several times. There is not enough evidence of fraud to negatively assess the trust of this user.
I was charged with protecting the service and in the conflict of interest. In this post, KTChampions lied twice. I do not advertise or defend the service. Smart man is not my friend, I am not familiar with it.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.51419663
http://archive.md/VQtc1
User Smart man does not have marks for this episode, from other users. I think everyone understands that my opinion cannot have such an effect. Moreover, I started to participate in the discussion only on June 10, 2019.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1090672
Other cases involving Smart man, I have not studied.
3 Another slander about me.
And chimik has an alt which is connected with a set of merit abusers.
Quote
Polkeins 4/6/2018 3:49:26 PM password reset via email
7/9/2018 6:24:31 AM password changed
8/9/2018 6:55:31 PM password changed
chimk 4/16/2018 8:44:51 PM password reset via email
8/9/2018 9:55:07 PM password changed
7/9/2018 6:24:31 AM password changed
8/9/2018 6:55:31 PM password changed
chimk 4/16/2018 8:44:51 PM password reset via email
8/9/2018 9:55:07 PM password changed
This is slander. Please verify this charge, if possible. password reset in April on different dates? More stupid accusations I have not met. Changing the password matched in numbers, but did not coincide in time. Maybe there is someone else who changed the password 8/9/2018? This method of accusations can be a scenario for future attacks, now I will take countermeasures.
4. Merit Smart man.
For the first time I awarded him the merits of 2/25/2019 and 3/29/2019
for a little investigation into the bounty. Before that, he received a lot of merit without my participation. Examples:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31419121
48 merit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.31593227
45 merit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.33070682
28 merit
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.35298458
17 merit.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.29729057
12 merit
After this, Smart man began to write more about bitcoin and I liked that the number of content posts on btc increased. I began to award him more merit. The increase in outgoing merits from the Smart man also contributed to this, earlier he was less willing to distribute outgoing merits.
5.
This model of behavior did not change even when two DT kzv (Hero member, DT-1), MaoChao (Legendary, DT-1) members expressed the opinion that the available evidence directly speaks about hiring in a bumping service and offering a bumping service.
The only change that happened - Chimik excluded kzv from his trusted list and added him to the list of users whom he does not trust!
Surprisingly, these two members of DT, did not leave a mark in the Smart man’s trust. I hope they understand that nobody restricts them in this right.The only change that happened - Chimik excluded kzv from his trusted list and added him to the list of users whom he does not trust!
I removed kzv from the list of trust much earlier, I did not like its list of trust, in particular, there was amaclin1. We discussed this with him in personal correspondence. ~ kzv I put, after kzv wanted to include fxpc in my list, which I consider to be a bitcoin hater, a troll, I consider him a dangerous person, I got the impression that this is an unbalanced person with problems in the psyche, he often offends users and I I do not trust him. I also do not understand the kzv logic on some issues related to DT. I gradually formed the opinion that at the moment he is not ready for this work and to trust him DT, this is a bad service to him and the forum. I have no other complaints about kzv, I consider it a useful user. I often gave him merit for his contribution to the development of the forum and to maintain the section of CODERS, this is an act of trust.
This is another little detail of distorting the facts.
6. I give some examples to understand the prehistory. There are many examples, this is a large amount. In the Russian section, this situation is known.
In the Russian section, I wrote that I consider the activities of fxpc and KTChampions harmful for the forum. I did not make direct threats in changing the trust. But I made a lot of complaints about them to moderators, this can be seen in the statistics of the reports. For example, I made a lot of reports in the topic Analytics, analysis, forecasts. I made a lot of reports on the Lightning Network. Moderators have attached this topic in the section, at my request https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.30028849
and I promised that we will maintain cleanliness in this topic.
In the topic of high activity KTChampions, fxpc, apxu (amaclin1).
Off top rudely took on such a scale that one of the most active and experienced users wanted to stop supporting the Lightning Network theme.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50233157
And I wrote to him publicly that these people are trying to achieve just that, the cessation of any activity in the development of BTC.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50236602
Another example of a smart man creates a bitcoin theme.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--5150471
In the topic of high activity KTChampions, fxpc, apxu (amaclin1)
KTChampions is trying to prove that the BTC is a pyramid, calls BTC enthusiasts sectarians. fxpc rude to users, apxu (amaclin1) criticizes the technical side of the BTC.
http://archive.md/zVyA8
Example number 3 in the topic Bitcoin vs Gold vs Fiat I posted a link to the video that Bitcoin is more convenient than gold, I wrote that this video is gaining popularity. KTChampions wrote that this did not correspond to reality and accused me of distorting facts, fxpc supported him in an insulting form, after which I gave evidence of the popularity of this video.
http://archive.md/YRXEE#selection-465.4-465.29
7.
There is definitely an issue of many permabanned users getting merit. I think the main issue is that plagiarism is hard to detect and often fools the reader into believing that it is a good quality post.
Permabanned user getting merit doesn't mean that merit was sent for e.g. plagiarised posts. tvplus006 and lovesmayfamilis are notable scam researchers and got a lot of merits for that work. Later turned out to have plagiarised in the past.
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lovesmayfamilis
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tvplus006
I believe chimk ended up at the top of the list mainly because of users like that, and not because of lack of due diligence in sending merits, let alone corruption.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50995549
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lovesmayfamilis
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tvplus006
you can add to them
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=WhiteManWhite member DT1 received merit
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=FapToBbly active participant and BTC supporter
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=markiz73 active member supporting the section MINERS.
They all deserved merit and looked reliable, I often check profiles, but there is not enough time for everyone. It is especially difficult to find plagiarism in another language. And I did not support anyone in appeals, because everyone knew about the responsibility for plagiarism. And everyone saw this list in which the number of blocked for plagiarism is greater.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--4588431
But this does not mean that I disclaim responsibility for my mistakes.
I apologize to the administrator for the poor statistics in this period, who entrusted me with helping the forum, as well as the entire community.
The other day I will write about it separately, I will indicate how I am guided in the distribution of merit and with what difficulties I encounter.
8. Is there corruption in the Russian section? I think that there is. I have some suspicions, I conducted several investigations. But I do not have enough evidence to state this publicly. Are there any improvements in the Russian section? Of course, there are major improvements. Thanks to those who found the opportunity to participate in the consideration of the charges.
I did a lot of work a few days, came home yesterday, today wrote this message, which allowed me to understand the importance of what I was doing. The growth of bitcoin brings pain to some people))) they need to buy some soothing medicines. Now I have to go to bed, it’s already morning.
P.S. Sorry for the mistakes, I wrote and translated all night.
Edit:changed the design item number 3
Someone is blind. Isn't that great? 
Many people really look blind here, he is littlerly comparing mining with account farming and think's it is more profitable also advicing the same to the newbies in the local section. He has already earned much of an merits from this cycle documented in the OP. Looks really untrustworthy LOL!
Quote
Only an account in half a year theoretically costs the same money and
can be sold. But the equipment is depreciated and is already cheaper. In this case, what is easier? Collect a farm and mine with the risk of burning it
and an apartment or writing 10 posts a week?
Source: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merit-faq-2891755 can be sold. But the equipment is depreciated and is already cheaper. In this case, what is easier? Collect a farm and mine with the risk of burning it
and an apartment or writing 10 posts a week?
Someone is blind. Isn't that great?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merit-faq-2891755
http://archive.fo/SmmLM
Translation:
Original:
Ninety-eighth most merited:
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Smart%20man
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/merit-faq-2891755
http://archive.fo/SmmLM
Translation:
Quote
So what do beginners who want to participate in the bounty but can't pump accounts?
It's simple. Want to bounty? Buy accounts and participate. On the forum a lot of sellers. The average price of a member now is $250-300, a full member costs $800-1000.
It seems to you that it is expensive? Let's figure it out.
You can easily get $250 for half a year on a bounty (less is possible, more is possible, as lucky). Compare with the same mining, where the return of investments in new equipment for half a year is considered a very good result. Only an account in half a year theoretically costs the same money and can be sold.
~
Those who need accounts, stupidly buy them now as much as you need.
It's simple. Want to bounty? Buy accounts and participate. On the forum a lot of sellers. The average price of a member now is $250-300, a full member costs $800-1000.
It seems to you that it is expensive? Let's figure it out.
You can easily get $250 for half a year on a bounty (less is possible, more is possible, as lucky). Compare with the same mining, where the return of investments in new equipment for half a year is considered a very good result. Only an account in half a year theoretically costs the same money and can be sold.
~
Those who need accounts, stupidly buy them now as much as you need.
Original:
Quote
Taк чтo дeлaть нoвичкaм, кoтopыe xoтят yчacтвoвaть в бayнти, нo нe мoгyт пpoкaчaть aккayнты?
Bce пpocтo. Xoтитe бayнти? Пoкyпaйтe aкки и yчacтвyйтe. Пpoдaвцoв нa фopyмe кyчa. Cpeдняя цeнa мeмбepa ceйчac 250$-300$, ФyлMeмбepa 800-1000$.
Baм кaжeтcя чтo этo дopoгo? Дaвaйтe paзбиpaтьcя.
250$ мoжнo cпoкoйнo пoлyчить зa пoл гoдa нa бayнти (мoжнo мeньшe, мoжнo бoльшe, кaк пoвeзeт). Cpaвним c тeм жe мaйнингoм, гдe oтбитиe
зa пoл гoдa нoвoгo oбopyдoвaния cчитaeтcя oчeнь xopoшим peзyльтaтoм. Toлькo aккayнт чepeз пoл гoдa тeopeтичecки cтoит тe жe дeньги и eгo
мoжнo пpoдaть.
~
Te кoмy нyжны aкки, тyпo пoкyпaйтe иx ceйчac cтoлькo, cкoлькo Baм нaдo.
Bce пpocтo. Xoтитe бayнти? Пoкyпaйтe aкки и yчacтвyйтe. Пpoдaвцoв нa фopyмe кyчa. Cpeдняя цeнa мeмбepa ceйчac 250$-300$, ФyлMeмбepa 800-1000$.
Baм кaжeтcя чтo этo дopoгo? Дaвaйтe paзбиpaтьcя.
250$ мoжнo cпoкoйнo пoлyчить зa пoл гoдa нa бayнти (мoжнo мeньшe, мoжнo бoльшe, кaк пoвeзeт). Cpaвним c тeм жe мaйнингoм, гдe oтбитиe
зa пoл гoдa нoвoгo oбopyдoвaния cчитaeтcя oчeнь xopoшим peзyльтaтoм. Toлькo aккayнт чepeз пoл гoдa тeopeтичecки cтoит тe жe дeньги и eгo
мoжнo пpoдaть.
~
Te кoмy нyжны aкки, тyпo пoкyпaйтe иx ceйчac cтoлькo, cкoлькo Baм нaдo.
Ninety-eighth most merited:
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=Smart%20man
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
Give answer please.
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
Give answer please.
1. Maybe yes, maybe no. I don't see 100% proof.
2. From what such conclusions are drawn?
3. I'm not aware of this project.
4. Proposed service - Yes, the spam service - where is the evidence? Back to my 4 questions:
1.) What proof is required? Notarized receipt? I showed the facts.
2.) Did you read this post?
Everything is already clear, but I went further. I checked the topic where Smart Man offers his services (writing WP and promotion of ICO) and allegedly communicates with customers. Within 10 minutes, I discovered that most of the discussion participants were alts of Smart Man. To save space and time I will show the most interesting ones:
Blanchrc40 3/25/2018 9:32:14 PM password changed 5/9/2019 8:34:21 AM woke up
Hiring in bumping service
MrBoston 3/25/2018 9:48:00 PM password changed 5/14/2019 9:52:40 PM woke up
Fixxer767 3/25/2018 10:20:35 PM password changed 5/12/2019 1:30:10 AM woke up
Jeronimo78 3/18/2018 4:13:10 PM password changed 5/9/2019 8:29:33 AM woke up
Blanchrc40 3/25/2018 9:32:14 PM password changed 5/9/2019 8:34:21 AM woke up
Hiring in bumping service
MrBoston 3/25/2018 9:48:00 PM password changed 5/14/2019 9:52:40 PM woke up
Fixxer767 3/25/2018 10:20:35 PM password changed 5/12/2019 1:30:10 AM woke up
Jeronimo78 3/18/2018 4:13:10 PM password changed 5/9/2019 8:29:33 AM woke up
3.) Find out. It is easy.
There are banned user Afina_22
She sent merit to Smart man and was connected to him through other abusers. She is the topic starter (in russian local) of scam project Adab Solutions
Who started the topic in the English section? - whitetoo 3/25/2018 9:53:53 PM password changed
3/25/2018 10:26:45 PM password changed
Smart man himself confessed that he collaborated with Adab and received money from them, but everyone pretended that they did not notice this. Even after I pointed it out!
She sent merit to Smart man and was connected to him through other abusers. She is the topic starter (in russian local) of scam project Adab Solutions
Who started the topic in the English section? - whitetoo 3/25/2018 9:53:53 PM password changed
3/25/2018 10:26:45 PM password changed
Smart man himself confessed that he collaborated with Adab and received money from them, but everyone pretended that they did not notice this. Even after I pointed it out!
4.) Do you also need proof that spam service exists to produce spam?
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
Give answer please.
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
Give answer please.
1. Maybe yes, maybe no. I don't see 100% proof.
2. From what such conclusions are drawn?
3. I'm not aware of this project.
4. Proposed service - Yes, the spam service - where is the evidence? Back to my 4 questions:
Reasonable questions to be asked:
1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
As I said - there are no answers to these questions - there is no evidence that the service was engaged in spam.
Alex_Sr (Hero member, DT-1)
For whom did I write about the search of proofs?
Quote
Reasonable questions to be asked:
1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
There are answers to these questions - there is a red trust, there are no answers to these questions - there is no red trust. It seems accessible and understandable?1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
Thank you for translating my quote. As I already wrote previously - your weakness lies in absence of 100% proof. It's a digital forum. Users forum much more believe facts and figure, than idle speculation.
Quote
1.) Smart man is involved in a huge circuit of merit abuse. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
2.) Smart man has a lot of alts and with the help of them he deceives customers by making false reviews in his thread. Yes/No?
3.) Smart man is involved in the scam project Adab Solutions. Yes/No?
4.) Smart man was hiring in and offering Spam-service. Yes/No?
Give answer please.
Alex_Sr (Hero member, DT-1)
For whom did I write about the search of proofs?
Quote
Reasonable questions to be asked:
1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
1. What accounts were hired?
2. What threads did they write in?
3. Give examples of messages, how many messages are deleted as spam?
4. Was there a contract at all?
Thank you for translating my quote. As I already wrote previously - your weakness lies in absence of 100% proof. It's a digital forum. Users forum much more believe facts and figure, than idle speculation.
You have created a world of your own, and you consider as proof those things that are not really proof.
I believe chimk ended up at the top of the list mainly because of users like that, and not because of lack of due diligence in sending merits, let alone corruption.
This question requires a separate discussion. At the moment, chimik is accused of corruption because of the protection of the scamer - Smart man.
Disagreeing with your opinion is not "protection".
As xtraelv mentioned, this is best resolved on the Russian board where users have a better understanding and better sense of context for the allegations. But you didn't get the support you wanted there so now you're fishing on the English boards hoping that someone among the non-Russian-speaking DT members will take your word for it. Combined with your tendency to jump to conclusions without evidence, I find that quite dishonest.
I showed evidence on all counts.
Do you propose to ask corrupt users to fight with themselves? Good point
I believe chimk ended up at the top of the list mainly because of users like that, and not because of lack of due diligence in sending merits, let alone corruption.
This question requires a separate discussion. At the moment, chimik is accused of corruption because of the protection of the scamer - Smart man.
Disagreeing with your opinion is not "protection".
As xtraelv mentioned, this is best resolved on the Russian board where users have a better understanding and better sense of context for the allegations. But you didn't get the support you wanted there so now you're fishing on the English boards hoping that someone among the non-Russian-speaking DT members will take your word for it. Combined with your tendency to jump to conclusions without evidence, I find that quite dishonest.
I believe chimk ended up at the top of the list mainly because of users like that, and not because of lack of due diligence in sending merits, let alone corruption.
This question requires a separate discussion. At the moment, chimik is accused of corruption because of the protection of the scamer - Smart man.
There is definitely an issue of many permabanned users getting merit. I think the main issue is that plagiarism is hard to detect and often fools the reader into believing that it is a good quality post.
Permabanned user getting merit doesn't mean that merit was sent for e.g. plagiarised posts. tvplus006 and lovesmayfamilis are notable scam researchers and got a lot of merits for that work. Later turned out to have plagiarised in the past.
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=lovesmayfamilis
https://bpip.org/profile.aspx?p=tvplus006
I believe chimk ended up at the top of the list mainly because of users like that, and not because of lack of due diligence in sending merits, let alone corruption.
Jump to: