Pages:
Author

Topic: WHICH flags are appropriate for each scenario listed here??????????????????????? - page 3. (Read 1258 times)

legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
Now look we must stay on topic? can you do so?

I actually gave you the best advice you're going to get in this thread and you drowned it out with clearly off-topic insults and ranting. Don't know what more you expect. Redemption?

No you did not. What is our end goal?

Oh, LFC and killyou72's advice was also pretty good. Trolling is clearly your end goal because you steamrolled over their advice (and mine).

Because if you can demonstrate it is anything other than an environment that is based upon a transparent set of fair rules than ensure all members are treated equally. Then you can ask us for a 0.02btc loan in future.

OK but only if its a no-collateral loan. According to your trust summary you have a "high risk of losing money" and I'm not sure I'd feel safe giving you my collateral.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
Now look we must stay on topic? can you do so?

I actually gave you the best advice you're going to get in this thread and you drowned it out with clearly off-topic insults and ranting. Don't know what more you expect. Redemption?

No you did not. What is our end goal? Because if you can demonstrate it is anything other than an environment that is based upon a transparent set of fair rules than ensure all members are treated equally. Then you can ask us for a 0.02btc loan in future.
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
Now look we must stay on topic? can you do so?

I actually gave you the best advice you're going to get in this thread and you drowned it out with clearly off-topic insults and ranting. Don't know what more you expect. Redemption?
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
@the-one-above-all could you let us know the secret of your writing skills. I mean from where you got all these energy for writings? Sorry if it's off topics



But then others will be able to compete in terms of number of words if not with the reason and logic that allows them to flow so rapidly and with such strength. You will do well to find an instance where our central point has been clearly debunked. Meta board is excellent fun. We though welcome the days where we can discuss more positive things together rather than demonstrating most people frequenting this tiny sub board are power hungry greedy scum bags that don't mind destroying other peoples accounts to ensure they cream off the best financial deals here.

The new flag system is excellent. Even if the Lemons flag is a little weak. We only hope theymos is not pushed back further by the bullies here. Our next plan is to invite a lot of older legends from the alts boards to join here.  We need to raise the bar here. Too many fragile minds ready to snap like twigs and then become angry and bitter like suchmoron or moronbozo or lauda or well it would be easier to name those that are even really a slight challenge to debate with. There are but a handful of members I guess.

Meta we notice guides this forum quite heavily. It would be better to fill meta with more suitable and capable minds. You may start noticing a few new members appearing here that are going to raise the standards of debate to a level that makes them more interested and less of a slagging match centered around false allegations, wild speculation and spew from weak and dull minds. Some have a nice command of the English language but that flowery veneer is soon peeled back to reveal the disappointment beneath. Kind of like those teenagers that fix a big exhaust pipe to their grandmothers old car. You turn to view the exotic sports automobile roaring up the street,  and you see the black smoking, pathetic example of 20 year old ghetto level transportation crawling along. Same thing.

Anyway, back on topic.  So these are all flag level 1 if you are not effected by them personally right? so it ranges from LEMONS to lies and scamming that nearly cost the board a $ 2 000 000 000 dollar compensation offer. Seems a very broad range.

@nutildah

Yes, frustratingly similar are we not. Almost as if I has to be the same person publishing from both accounts. Yet there could be several explanations that would account for it all. Perhaps ALL will be revealed at the right time.

Now stay on topic please. You simply can not contain yourself can you our EVIL scam facilitating broke ass little friend. Do you need another 0.02BTC loan?  What on earth happened to your NEM stake? you blew 300BTC already? or lauda took it when you were bent over in front of him.

Now look we must stay on topic? can you do so?
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
No theymos is NOT a liar. He is simply making a best guess based on the server side information we intended him to have. Theymos though is incorrect. If we wanted him to have at hand the same information as you and nothing more we would have used tor browser and made a few other changes too.

Quoted for future posterity.

Sorry CH, nothing would prevent people from knowing that you are CH -- your ego won't let you hide yourself. Anybody can tell that its you. You praise yourself far too often and go on raving, long-winded rants about the exact same subjects you did with your last account, with an equal amount of futility. You also use the same colloquial terms not shared by other members of the forum. You stand out from a mile away. Theymos didn't have to look at any IP information to know that you are cryptohunter. Neither do any of us.

The best way to test out a flag is to leave it and see if it gets supported or not. Don't use it as an excuse to again air your tired personal grievances. If you know an injustice was committed, post your flag, and see what kind of a response it gets. Don't pretend to be asking for guidance when you really just want to rehash the same old drama in a new context. Nobody is going to help you out here because everybody knows what your end goal is.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
You (cryptohunter) might've had some case for the trust system being broken if you had handled your initial trust issues with rationality and patience instead of absolutely losing your mind and throwing lies around, and even now I could imagine your red trust eventually being cleared if you were able to attain a stable mindset.

So basically you are saying theymos is a liar?

we are saying theymos does NOT have video evidence nor proof that our account is operated by the same person that operated the cryptohunter account. YES!! you are getting it our EVIL SCAM FACILITATING IMBECILE.

Quit dodging the question. Is theymos a liar or not?

Perhaps WE ARE THEYMOS? have you considered that?

No, no I had not considered that. I don't think anybody had considered that you are not cryptohunter to be honest.

Back to the topic at hand, you are free to leave your own flags. You don't need to conduct a "community consensus" on everything that you do or think. Just do it. Meta is no longer the correct section to ask such questions. Might as well move your consensus-building topics to Reputation, and then you can self-moderate them.

No theymos is NOT a liar. He is simply making a best guess based on the server side information we intended him to have. Theymos though is incorrect. If we wanted him to have at hand the same information as you and nothing more we would have used tor browser and made a few other changes too. It in unusual for theymos to intercede and attempt to out a member as an ALT in public when not called upon to do so, or not involving any scams. However we wanted to present a small test. As we say the result was a little disappointing but then we are not among the very most popular with admins because they do not understand we want the same thing. A transparent set of rules that ensure the fair and equal treatment of all members. So we did not become too upset over it.

That is good. As intended. You should not think too much you are likely to start feeling discomfort and frustration.

No we think at these early stages some precedents that are commonly agreed on should be discussed.
No we think that meta is best and that people should make an effort to stay on topic and relevant to the questions in the OP of their own volition. So please do so. Trying to attack us on every thread does nothing only to reflect poorly and ensure the board is littered with examples of your own scam facilitating for payment behavior, that is there as PROOF, not speculation.

We will not raise a flag for you at this stage but please refrain from these weak sauce off topic attacks lacking proof or any real relevance when you are dealing with observable instances that are verifiable independently  and require no trust of ourselves nor our motives. Just tell yourself we the true legend if that makes you happier. We like to indulge those fantasies.
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
You (cryptohunter) might've had some case for the trust system being broken if you had handled your initial trust issues with rationality and patience instead of absolutely losing your mind and throwing lies around, and even now I could imagine your red trust eventually being cleared if you were able to attain a stable mindset.

So basically you are saying theymos is a liar?

we are saying theymos does NOT have video evidence nor proof that our account is operated by the same person that operated the cryptohunter account. YES!! you are getting it our EVIL SCAM FACILITATING IMBECILE.

Quit dodging the question. Is theymos a liar or not?

Perhaps WE ARE THEYMOS? have you considered that?

No, no I had not considered that. I don't think anybody had considered that you are not cryptohunter to be honest.

Back to the topic at hand, you are free to leave your own flags. You don't need to conduct a "community consensus" on everything that you do or think. Just do it. Meta is no longer the correct section to ask such questions. Might as well move your consensus-building topics to Reputation, and then you can self-moderate them.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
How do you know we have not been lurking since 2010? that is right you do NOT. Like you do NOT have video evidence the member that operated the cryptohunter account is operating this account.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50571141
You have no PROOF.

You (cryptohunter) might've had some case for the trust system being broken if you had handled your initial trust issues with rationality and patience instead of absolutely losing your mind and throwing lies around, and even now I could imagine your red trust eventually being cleared if you were able to attain a stable mindset.

So basically you are saying theymos is a liar? He wrote that post on May 2nd, and you've only gotten worse since then. Your lies are now more out of control than ever. This forum has its fair share of trolls, which you are one of. So, have fun doing what you do best, I guess...

BTW, nobody "lurks" since 2010. Your claim would be supported by much greater evidence if you actually had an account that dated back a few years. Say to maybe April 2013 or something...

we are saying theymos does NOT have video evidence nor proof that our account is operated by the same person that operated the cryptohunter account. YES!! you are getting it our EVIL SCAM FACILITATING IMBECILE.

He has access to server side information that it was intended he should have to see what would happen. It was disappointing but still he seems to have more than made up for it of late. You have not heard of tor browser we take it? LOL .. theymos is not magic you do understand that? or perhaps he is here with us right now with his video camera. Perhaps WE ARE THEYMOS? have you considered that?

Either way please stay on topic. We have PROOF. You have NADA. You have what it was intended you have. Like the person trying to hide would come here all calling the same pet names and going after the same people. LOL  

All may be revealed in time. Then you may all look even more foolish.

Get back to begging for 0.02btc loans like you were just a few months ago and stop derailing our thread. Stick to answering the questions directly posed in the OP.

"nobody lurks since" "everyone knows" "theymos said" " I will help scam people for 0.3 btc"  please stop looking silly now and stay on topic.

LOL 2013 - suchnoobs

legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
How do you know we have not been lurking since 2010? that is right you do NOT. Like you do NOT have video evidence the member that operated the cryptohunter account is operating this account.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50571141
You have no PROOF.

You (cryptohunter) might've had some case for the trust system being broken if you had handled your initial trust issues with rationality and patience instead of absolutely losing your mind and throwing lies around, and even now I could imagine your red trust eventually being cleared if you were able to attain a stable mindset.

So basically you are saying theymos is a liar? He wrote that post on May 2nd, and you've only gotten worse since then. Your lies are now more out of control than ever. This forum has its fair share of trolls, which you are one of. So, have fun doing what you do best, I guess...

BTW, nobody "lurks" since 2010. Your claim would be supported by much greater evidence if you actually had an account that dated back a few years. Say to maybe April 2013 or something...
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
Even if your first assertion is possibly true. Not that we are an alt of anyone. That is merely a poor reflection on this state of the trust system. Why should one asking such questions be at risk of getting negative trust. So unless you have video evidence of another member posting on this account why bother considering it? what relevance does it have to the initial post.

OK so you're not an alt of anyone (let's just ignore the fact that this is a blatant lie) and the fact that your trust history says you are cryptohunter is just a "poor reflection" of the state of the trust system. Why should anyone care what you have to say about matters that happened well before your time? You're just a Jr Member who has only been on the forum since earlier this year. How did you develop such an ingrained, biased, nuanced opinion of things that happened years before you were a member?

You should let more senior accounts that are far more familiar with the history of forum matters than you deal with new changes to the trust system. Just sit back and... well... do whatever it is that you "do" when you're not bitching about the forum.

Also, I think your thread title needs more question marks.

Why ask a question we have answered you before ...just for back ground on this false accuser who has no PROOF there can be many explanations for whatever compilation of intentional goodies we are giving you all to frustrate you further.

How do you know we have not been lurking since 2010? that is right you do NOT. Like you do NOT have video evidence the member that operated the cryptohunter account is operating this account.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50571141
You have no PROOF.

We have proof that you will willingly and knowingly facilitate scamming for 0.3 btc and you actually confess that you are EVIL.

WHY SHOULD ANYONE LISTEN TO SOMEONE EVIL who for 0.3btc will help scammers scam other members??

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50719875

this is a good point i need to put up a flag clarification scenario for someone who says they want to facilitate scamming for 0.3btc and is EVIL. thanks for reminding me.

Now keep on topic please we are discussing the question posed in the initial post.
legendary
Activity: 3010
Merit: 8114
Even if your first assertion is possibly true. Not that we are an alt of anyone. That is merely a poor reflection on this state of the trust system. Why should one asking such questions be at risk of getting negative trust. So unless you have video evidence of another member posting on this account why bother considering it? what relevance does it have to the initial post.

OK so you're not an alt of anyone (let's just ignore the fact that this is a blatant lie) and your trust history saying you are cryptohunter is just a "poor reflection" of the state of the trust system. Why should anyone care what you have to say about matters that happened well before your time? You're just a Jr Member who has only been on the forum since earlier this year. How did you develop such an ingrained, biased, nuanced opinion of things that happened years before you were a member?

You should let more senior accounts that are far more familiar with the history of forum matters than you deal with new changes to the trust system. Just sit back and... well... do whatever it is that you "do" when you're not bitching about the forum.

Also, I think your thread title needs more question marks.
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
Why not post this from your main account? are you too afraid of the backlash you will receive?


I don't think any flags are necessary for any. Just assume that everyone here is a lair, cheater, and stealer and take the proper pro-cations when trading, and mind your own business

Even if your first assertion is possibly true. Not that we are an alt of anyone. That is merely a poor reflection on this state of the trust system. Why should one asking such questions be at risk of getting negative trust. So unless you have video evidence of another member posting on this account why bother considering it? what relevance does it have to the initial post. The answers should be the same if any of those questions was asked by ANY other member.

Allowing whistle blowers to be given scam tags is the very reason a sensible person may decide to use a shield here. Stop the abuse and REALLY blacklist abusers and no need for shields.

Please tell theymos to delete the entire trust system them and just put a message on every ones account " this person is possibly going to scam you as soon as they can"


hero member
Activity: 2254
Merit: 960
100% Deposit Match UP TO €5000!
Why not post this from your main account? are you too afraid of the backlash you will receive?


I don't think any flags are necessary for any. Just assume that everyone here is a lair, cheater, and stealer and take the proper pro-cations when trading, and mind your own business
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 9709
#1 VIP Crypto Casino
Unless you personally have suffered losses / been scammed yourself by the account in question then the only flag you can add on a profile is the first option -

Due to various concrete red flags, I believe that anyone dealing with this user has a high risk of losing money. (This flag will only be shown to guests/newbies.)
member
Activity: 252
Merit: 56
Just to get a rough idea of how to set up my flags. With some examples of scenarios

1.  lauda, owlcatz , tman - extortion attempt which many senior members believe WAS a real attempt to extort another member

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/laudatmanminifrijironmarvel2owlcatz-extortion-attempt-1764757

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

2. laudas et als shady looking escrow dealings concerning 3000BTC

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.44083126

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

3. laudas PROVEN lie for financial gain (SCAMMING) that he was on the launch of xcoin/dark and there was NO Instamine whilst holding bags of it.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6748208

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?

4. lauda et al's flagrant and continued trust abuse and giving out red trust to persons that presented observable instances of his past here.

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that was not directly effected?


Local rule - you must give a sensible reasoned answer with some grounding based on the new flags rules

5. Nutildah knowingly by his own words trying to or succeeding at  facilitating scams for a payment of 0.3BTC

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50719875

a/ what flag is suitable for a directly effected member?
b/ what flag is suitable for a concerned member that ws not directly effected?


Pages:
Jump to: