UPDATED [prison break] Full list of users who lost their DT red trust from Lauda - page 3.

coinlocket$

legendary

Activity: 2534

Merit: 1517

#1 VIP Crypto Casino

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 12:06:56 PM

Interesting how you excluded the "(ICO bumping)" part of the trust feedback...

~

Be honest, what do you think tagging people for ICO bumping is going to achieve? Their goal is to cause ICO threads to be on the first few pages of the ICO sub. These accounts are not used (to my knowledge) to trade. If anything, tagging these accounts gives legitimacy to someone trying to sell these kinds of services to someone using these services from a particular person.

I am strongly against any ICO bumping service, but this is something that needs to be dealt with by the administration.

No, they are not used for trading but the accounts may possibly sold as happened to a part of my list, here

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bumping-ico-bounty-service-allowed-69-accounts-involved-so-far-need-dt-or-mod-3063184

If you look at post history of some of those accounts they are now bounty spammers.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2371

Quote from: DarkStar_ on October 08, 2018, 11:38:52 AM

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 03:18:30 AM

Quote from: to airtman

Looking for people to actively break forum rules ...

Administration issue, not a trust issue

Interesting how you excluded the "(ICO bumping)" part of the trust feedback...

Be honest, what do you think tagging people for ICO bumping is going to achieve? Their goal is to cause ICO threads to be on the first few pages of the ICO sub. These accounts are not used (to my knowledge) to trade. If anything, tagging these accounts gives legitimacy to someone trying to sell these kinds of services to someone using these services from a particular person.

I am strongly against any ICO bumping service, but this is something that needs to be dealt with by the administration.

DarkStar_

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 3282

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 03:18:30 AM

Quote from: to airtman

Looking for people to actively break forum rules ...

Administration issue, not a trust issue

Interesting how you excluded the "(ICO bumping)" part of the trust feedback...

marlboroza

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 2272

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 03:18:30 AM

~

It wasn't really a question I needed answer Roll Eyes

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 03:33:35 AM

Bonus TIL: Cheating and chronic lying are not untrustworthy behavior. Roll Eyes

I don't get it either.
According to quacky we should trust cheaters, abusers, liars, plagiarists, rule breakers...
It has to be perfectly logical explanation why qs said this.

Perhaps this?

Quote

You're also a full-blown scammer-by-proxy through the fact that you sell forum accounts so others can deceive the community.

Yeah, it make sense.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: shasan on October 08, 2018, 04:28:25 AM

Have you verified it? I could not see any trust rating on Lauda from HostFat & Tomatocage.

Yes it's verified. Click the link, it's not about trust ratings, it's about being put on DT2.
See subSTRATA's explanation.

shasan

copper member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 1299

Playbet.io - Crypto Casino and Sportsbook

Quote from: LoyceV on October 07, 2018, 01:27:11 PM

Lauda was recently removed from DT2:

Quote from: BitCoinDream on October 07, 2018, 07:21:25 AM

As per, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;full, Lauda is...

Included by: Blazed & hilariousandco

Excluded by: HostFat, OgNasty & Tomatocage

Have you verified it? I could not see any trust rating on Lauda from HostFat & Tomatocage.

Veleor

legendary

Activity: 1484

Merit: 1655

Rêlêå§ê ¥ðµr MïñÐ

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 03:18:30 AM

Can I list all of them? No, there are too many. Some examples of this are below:

Quote from: to Kaleridi

Merit abuse.

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote from: to dumbtool45

Plagiarism.

Needs to be dealt with by administration, not a trust issue

Kaleridi has been banned. [BPIP]

dumbtool45 is a bounty cheater, merit abuser, plagiarist. [Reference]

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Quickseller on October 08, 2018, 03:18:30 AM

-snip-
This is far from a comprehensive list, and I just found some examples starting from the most recent ratings Lauda left.

Not a single rating on that list is invalid. You don't understand the trust system. Bonus TIL: Cheating and chronic lying are not untrustworthy behavior. Roll Eyes

Should anyone be surprised that a petty scammer has twisted views on this? Your frustration has led to some pretty sad behavior. Try harder.

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2371

Quote from: marlboroza on October 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on October 07, 2018, 04:44:53 PM

It might be a good idea to either post or review the text of the rating. On its face, many of the ratings lauda left are not for someone that is a scammer using any reasonable definition.

I am not sure what do you mean by "post or review the text of the rating". Do you think we should first look why someone was tagged, read reference and all that and then tag them Huh

I am saying that if you read the rating, you will see there is no point to reviewing the reference because there is no indication they are a scammer based on the text of the rating.

Quote from: marlboroza on October 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM

Quote

many of the ratings lauda left are not for someone that is a scammer using any reasonable definition

Can you please list all accounts with such rating? I don't want to tag wrong person. Thanks!

Can I list all of them? No, there are too many. Some examples of this are below:

Quote from: to Rmcdermott927

Left me a false negative rating...[no indication this person is in any way untrustworthy]

Quote from: to tdeannova

Abusing bounties with alt accounts.

I refuse to recognize someone having >2 accounts participating in a signature campaign as being a "scammer" -- they will provide the same amount of advertising as they are getting paid to provide. You may argue these people have a high rate of low quality posts, however if this is true, leaving negative trust for this is only covering up inaction by the administration (at best).

Quote from: to Kaleridi

Merit abuse.

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote from: to dumbtool45

Plagiarism.

Needs to be dealt with by administration, not a trust issue

Quote from: to airtman

Looking for people to actively break forum rules ...

Administration issue, not a trust issue

Quote from: to lapongetiasuu

Extortion attempt.

This rating is legit, if the text of the rating can be substantiated, however I highlight this rating for the irony.

Quote from: to aolley

Bamboozled supporter of Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Cash & criminals such as Roger Ver, Jihan & co. I suggest staying away from this user and their products.

Quote from: to SuperBuG

Using automated translation tools to defraud campaigns.

If their work quality is subpar, they will ultimately not get hired

Quote from: to Saphire

Attempted to abuse the content campaign by fraudulently claiming that I made a mistake while the user actually updated the content after it has been reviewed.
Lying baboon; avoid like the plague.

This is far from a comprehensive list, and I just found some examples starting from the most recent ratings Lauda left.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 02:19:27 AM

Not hearsay by part of the accusatory account, no. Perhaps I should clarify. It's hearsay from the user who sent it to the ICO-bumping buster account. Mysterious01.

Yeah, I had to edit my post a few times.

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 02:19:27 AM

At least one of those users, (i.e. endlasuresh) has complained.

There's at least a dozen of reasons for which that user should be tagged for (chronic lying is a notable one); not the best example.

I won't argue it further. Have fun hunting down these people; I'm already seeing signs of celebrations in off-forum channels (scammers rejoice?). Roll Eyes

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2510

Spear the bees

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 01:57:02 AM

Screenshots are genuine:

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 12:49:54 AM

I've logged into the account and verified the screenshots are not faked.

Not hearsay by part of the accusatory account, no. Perhaps I should clarify. It's hearsay from the user who sent it to the ICO-bumping buster account. Mysterious01.

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 01:57:02 AM

If you looked into the posting patterns, and times when some users were last active (e.g. "ScAryme") you would come to the same conclusion. In addition to that, you should factor in the lack of complaints from the 'alleged team members'.

At least one of those users, (i.e. endlasuresh) has complained. It really shouldn't be a "tag first and ensure innocence later" method to dealing with hearsay evidence.

An absence of refutation doesn't show guilt.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 01:44:23 AM

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 12:49:54 AM

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 12:32:25 AM

-snip-
If you are going through Lauda's list, please ignore these users. I believe that it is important to keep from a precedent which empowers scammers' ability to frame others.

You're going to ignore people offering ICO bumping services Huh

My opinion is that it isn't right to tag a user that is supposedly on some team of ICO bumpers.
As I have said, the users that I had posted in the code block were listed from a PM from a different user. There has been no definitive proof of linkage between them and the one that is promising ICO bumping. This is relying on hearsay at best.

~~Nevermind this part.~~ Screenshots are genuine:

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 12:49:54 AM

I've logged into the account and verified the screenshots are not faked.

If you looked into the posting patterns, and times when some users were last active (e.g. "ScAryme") you would come to the same conclusion. In addition to that, you should factor in the lack of complaints from the 'alleged team members'.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2510

Spear the bees

Quote from: Lauda on October 08, 2018, 12:49:54 AM

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 12:32:25 AM

-snip-
If you are going through Lauda's list, please ignore these users. I believe that it is important to keep from a precedent which empowers scammers' ability to frame others.

You're going to ignore people offering ICO bumping services Huh

My opinion is that it isn't right to tag a user that is supposedly on some team of ICO bumpers.

As I have said, the users that I had posted in the code block were listed from a PM from a different user. There has been no definitive proof of linkage between them and the one that is promising ICO bumping. This is relying on hearsay at best.

You can feel free to start a discourse about this if you want to argue toward the side of tagging vs. not.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: actmyname on October 08, 2018, 12:32:25 AM

-snip-
If you are going through Lauda's list, please ignore these users. I believe that it is important to keep from a precedent which empowers scammers' ability to frame others.

You're going to ignore people offering ICO bumping services Huh

Quote from: The Sceptical Chymist on October 08, 2018, 12:39:18 AM

This may have some negative repercussions on the forum, and I for one would like to know what changed in his eyes--though I suspect it's probably about the last scam accusation that was opened against Lauda about the escrow thing.

That would be absurd, as factually I couldn't have done anything on my own which stops the whole reputation attack in its tracks. There has to be something else.

The Sceptical Chymist

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6981

Top Crypto Casino

Quote from: eddie13 on October 07, 2018, 11:08:02 PM

if that is why any of them excluded lauda..

Not that he's required to do so, but it sure would be nice if there was some sort of explanation provided by SaltySpitoon. This may have some negative repercussions on the forum, and I for one would like to know what changed in his eyes--though I suspect it's probably about the last scam accusation that was opened against Lauda about the escrow thing.

Quote from: eddie13 on October 07, 2018, 11:08:02 PM

I don't like the idea of blindly copying all of lauda's tags.

I don't either, which is why I'm doing nothing for now. Lauda has been pretty good on the whole about leaving feedbacks, but the fact is that I've never looked through them all and don't intend to do so. And that's what I think a DT member (or team of same) would have to do if the red tags were to stay intact. That's a monumental task. I'm not even sure how long it'd take for me to check a dozen tags for accuracy, such that I'd stand by them with my own reputation, much less over a thousand.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2510

Spear the bees

Quote from: endlasuresh on October 07, 2018, 11:07:57 PM

I didn't thought Lauda will get removed from DT, but finally I am seeing this thread today.

I suggest you to put negative those have scammed instead of an eye. Scammers never learn a lesson instead of scamming others.

Your neg was literally based on hearsay evidence. It's inadmissible. I went ahead and checked just now.

In fact, none of those users from the single PM where one user mentioned a team should be given a negative without hard evidence.

Here's the list of names:

Code:

Mysterious01
llhibionada
adiksau0414
Sleepy18
UCHCHILD
ScAryme
CryptosapienZA
Phalo
zedkiel08
Mandy7575
dipok07
mariah.sadio
hadang
velosepur
miguel tiu
bamb
sammed
babsjoe
DARKANGEL6415
matico
endlasuresh
johnrickdalaygon
FDC1412
Bakukang
dinos69
estanislao1994
mpet5000
Webelong
jameyap32
themathiasmiller
arsenia
tinochan412
bonghip
creatine413
seriin
Text
rroyk
jituroych
Guzztsar
Rahadsr
seanpeabody
Soyab Khan
Coolwave
ABk195
jhenzdelacruz
Mehedi72
Chickenjoy
rishabhdtu1854

If you are going through Lauda's list, please ignore these users. I believe that it is important to keep from a precedent which empowers scammers' ability to frame others.

eddie13

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 2262

BTC or BUST

Quote from: actmyname on October 07, 2018, 04:31:26 PM

A few of the ratings I actually don't agree with. I let those accounts be.

I don't like the idea of blindly copying all of lauda's tags.
With all of lauda's exclusions and removal from DT, I think that many wise members do not blindly agree with them all either..
If you DTs just copy them all, they might exclude you too if that is why any of them excluded lauda..

I think it is great what actmyname did by reviewing the accounts and then applying their own personal morality to the situations.. Though I didn't look at any of them myself to agree on any specifically..

Soon, you will have to prove all of those accusations to the tagged accounts you echo'd when they come screaming, because "Because lauda did" is not good enough.. Be prepared to defend any tags you place..

endlasuresh

full member

Activity: 756

Merit: 103

I didn't thought Lauda will get removed from DT, but finally I am seeing this thread today.

I suggest you to put negative those have scammed instead of an eye. Scammers never learn a lesson instead of scamming others.

marlboroza

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 2272

Quote from: actmyname on October 07, 2018, 07:08:02 PM

Quote from: marlboroza on October 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM

Quote

many of the ratings lauda left are not for someone that is a scammer using any reasonable definition

Can you please list all accounts with such rating? I don't want to tag wrong person. Thanks!

This is an overarching statement but I believe it's ill-advised to tag those that are on the SMAS list. There were a number of users that were tagged because of this and the reason given was something along the lines of "likelihood of having alts" rather than a concrete reason.

Simply being blacklisted is not something that should warrant a tag.

There were also a few opinionated negs that were sent out, to which I did not echo.

Ok, when you quote only second part it looks stupid Roll Eyes

Quote from: actmyname on October 07, 2018, 04:31:26 PM

EDIT[3]: All 301 done.

I am at 100 at the moment. Not all are tagged, there are many threads and posts I have to take some time to read. Connected accounts are worst because I can't really tag 1 account and leave other accounts not tagged. Speaking off, you missed few accounts here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.30515128

I would tag them myself but that spreadsheet looks close, it says "access denied" and search button doesn't help, I can't find many addresses.
I have found 2 address which are connected to these accounts:

Hipster999 #260 Address : 0xCCE979a54Eb8000CBC516Dd9565b9552Da6c0C1d
Symphony_fr #239 Address : 0x8e564ff6Df82D74ca2dF61914E9fa48bfe182569

But search button went crazy! It showed me wrong result:

Quote from: horace08122 on May 02, 2017, 05:48:00 AM

Bitcointalk username: horace08122
ETH address: 0xCCE979a54Eb8000CBC516Dd9565b9552Da6c0C1d

Quote from: Samadur on April 25, 2017, 02:06:06 AM

Bitcointalk username: Samadur
Waves or ETH address: 0x8e564ff6Df82D74ca2dF61914E9fa48bfe182569

Well that is very strange.

Hopefully, this will make my previous post more...understandable.

actmyname

copper member

Activity: 2562

Merit: 2510

Spear the bees

Quote from: marlboroza on October 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM

Quote

many of the ratings lauda left are not for someone that is a scammer using any reasonable definition

Can you please list all accounts with such rating? I don't want to tag wrong person. Thanks!

This is an overarching statement but I believe it's ill-advised to tag those that are on the SMAS list. There were a number of users that were tagged because of this and the reason given was something along the lines of "likelihood of having alts" rather than a concrete reason.

Simply being blacklisted is not something that should warrant a tag.

There were also a few opinionated negs that were sent out, to which I did not echo.

Topic: UPDATED [prison break] Full list of users who lost their DT red trust from Lauda - page 3. (Read 26593 times)