If you only exclude someone from your trust list after they start questioning you (and nearly immediately thereof, and reasonably was aware of such prior squabbles prior to being questioned), then even if such personal squabbles are being arbitrated via the trust system, that is not the reason for the exclusion, the reason for the exclusion is to silence your critics and to warn others against speaking out against you.
I excluded BAC from my trust network shortly after he started leaving unwarranted negative feedback against all the CLAM developers. His feedback was no longer correct or useful and so I excluded it. That is what exclusion is for.
It is very difficult to put a dollar figure on the amount of money that was stolen as a result of dooglus's help (only in relation to his coding of a ponzi script) because it is not public information when someone uses his script.
I keep telling you. I don't and didn't code a Ponzi script. I removed some broken code from an existing Ponzi script.
The correct answer to the question "How much did dooglus steal?" is "nothing at all". But don't let that get in the way of your story telling.
1 - People have been labeled as scammers in the past for wearing signatures of scam/ponzi sites.
I have never knowingly worn the signature of a scam or Ponzi site. I did were signatures for 2 dice sites that ended up being scams, but I had no idea they were scams while I was wearing the signatures, and stopped wearing them as soon as I became concerned about the possibility of foul play.
2 - I don't think that receiving the .4BTC (or whatever few hundred dollar equivalent amount) in exchange for wearing the signature of a website that eventually turns out to be a scam would make you a scammer
That's my point. If you advertise an obvious Ponzi scam then you cannot reasonably claim you don't know you're advertising a scam. If you advertise what appears to be a regular dice site that eventually scams people I think that is quite different.
3 - IIRC, dooglus had made roughly 100BTC in profit between gambling at dicebitco.in and investing in their bankroll. This is when they were cheating their high rollers and stealing from their bankroll investors.
IIRC it was much less than that. I had a couple of good runs using Martingale betting but hit the inevitable losing streaks that put an end to it. Whether I won or lost doesn't seem to be relevant to whether I'm a scammer however, so what's your point? And I didn't play on their site once it came out that they were cheating their players. Why would I?
4 - Dooglus was downplaying the possibility of the operators of dicebitco.in being scammers up until very shortly before it was revealed they were scamming
This is completely false. I always said that I didn't know who they were and so had no way of knowing whether they were scammers or not. I was active in outing their scamming when Finile (was that his name?) first spotted the evidence.
5 - Much more information on this topic will come in Chapter 3
I can hardly wait.
Worried here this is going to one day be like everydice. Does anyone know the admin's identity or know their rep is as significant as Dooglus's was when he created Just-Dice?
EveryDice refunded everyone in full I believe.
Why would you worry about that?
Is that your evidence of me downloading the risk of them scamming?
I am saying that worrying about them turning out like a site that didn't scam isn't something to worry about. That is not the same as saying there is nothing else to worry about. Of course there is always a risk when trusting third parties with your money.
dooglus has a very long history of profiting from when other people have been scammed to the point of tens of thousands of dollars, and the amount of money stolen as a result of these scams is to the tune of millions of dollars.
I was lucky not to be scammed myself by those scammers,
Lucky enough so that you were always able to withdraw just before the operators decided to run away with every one's money.
In both cases there were warning signs. dicebitco.in were caught skipping bets, and dice.ninja stopped showing proof of solvency via their cold wallet. I posted about both of these things and withdrew my coins.
yet you twist the reality to try to make it look as if I was somehow to blame.
Or had advance knowledge of the scam, yet pushed (and advertised) the sites anyway. But this is off topic in this thread, it can be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3
I had no advance knowledge. You have no evidence that I had any advance knowledge, and yet keep insinuating that I did.
For a brief time I advertised a couple of sites that appeared to be running an honest service. Later, there were warning signs that they might not be honest. I withdrew my coins and warned people about the sites.
How does any of that mesh with your theory that I was somehow complicit in the scams? It would make no sense for me to post anything negative about the sites if I was "in on" the scams.
He also has a long history of hacking sites, and other transgressions that I intend on exposing, and preventing others from getting scammed similarly in the future.
More weasel words. You know how the word "hacking" has both ethical and blackhat meanings. I have never "hacked" a site in the way you are implying. I have found vulnerabilities in sites and reported them to the site owners.
There is no distinction between "whitehat" and "blackhat" hacking in the eyes of the law if the owner of the site has not expressly permitted you to attempt to find vulnerabilities.
The vulnerabilities were visible to anyone with a brain. You do not need permission to notice things. It's not like I went looking for them. I noticed that the sites were open to abuse by unethical people and responsibly disclosed the vulnerabilities to the sites. You somehow want to turn that into evidence against me? Go ahead!
You knew that Kyle (the operator of the CLAM based ponzi) had stolen 25BTC from investors of his ICO/IPO
As I understand it he has paid the majority of his debt back and is working to pay back the rest. He strikes me as a good guy with some problems, trying to make things right.
Your own negative trust rating against Kyle says that he should not be trusted with other people's money/coins
You knew that Kyle was the person running the CLAM based ponzi
The CLAM based ponzi would need to be trusted with player's CLAMs in order to operate
When you became aware that the operator of this CLAM based ponzi was Kyle, you actively chose not to warn others not to trust this person
Instead of warning others not to trust Kyle, you instead helped him potentially become trusted with more of other people's money via helping edit the code of the ponzi script he was using
I don't think it's a good idea for him to hold other people's money. He has shown in the past that he can't be trusted with it, and I'm not convinced that he wouldn't make the same mistake again in the future. Maybe he learned his lesson but I wouldn't be sure of it.
But despite that, the fact remains that he was indeed running a Ponzi scheme, and he was using a crappy open source PHP script to do it. The script had paid the first few players out twice each by mistake, and he had no idea why. He asked for my help in fixing the script and I gave it. I posted that I didn't think it was a good idea to be running the scheme, and that the staking rewards wouldn't pay for the returns. Having the script continue paying out incorrectly would be more likely to lead to the scheme defaulting than having it work right and so I decided to take a look at the script. After seeing how poorly coded it was I gave up and recommended he just stop using it.
This sounds vaguely familiar to me for some strange reason
Because you have somehow got it into your head that I'm doing bad things, and so you see everything I do in the same light.