Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

Reason 1:
If someone committed a crime in 2013 it is crime in 2017.
actmyname should be negative rated from lauda - why he is not negative rated? Why did Lauda ignored this:

Quote

Even when I had a lending service, I sold accounts. Then I stopped. Because it leads to shit.

He admitted selling accounts before, it is like saying "hey, i robbed few banks back in 2013. but i figured that it is wrong and i am not doing it now and it is OK because it is 2017"

Timeline of Alcohol Prohibition:
Alcohol was legal.
Prohibition began.
Alcohol became illegal.
Sale of alcohol led to incarceration.
People who had sold alcohol before prohibition were not punished.

Track the analogy.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

Lauda and Xanis were in 2 signature campaigns at the same time back in 2014. So why giving negative trust for accounts which are enrolled in his signature campaign without breaking forum rules or cheating his campaigns:
Proof: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1904885.msg18902983#msg18902983 how is that justified? Negative without any proof.

Quote from: Lauda on May 06, 2017, 11:49:53 PM

Here is the list just from last week (OP is slightly better than this list): kikeda, Format.C^, loges, yueno. I don't know why, but I have noticed a pattern which I'm not going to publicly elaborate as I may lose my advantage in combating it. There seems to be an influx of one-liner/short-posting & post-bursting in an attempt to get 1 maximum payout from Bitmixer before the account is permanently blacklisted and/or neg. rated.

Giving negative for "pattern" is not justified and it is not solid proof - lauda said it many times in "known alts of everyone" thread.

I send out negative trust towards those that are spammers. One-liners and burst-posting is usually indicative of spam.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

Lauda and Xanis were at the same time in signature campaigns - primedice and cloudbet, lauda hates account farming, we all know that

Read above.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

Speaking of 2013. this account has been negative rated for selling accounts(IN 2013 but actmyname said it was OK back then Huh

^^^)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=149628

http://prntscr.com/haq80u

Lauda ≠ Welsh ≠ tysat. Trust is at a user's discretion.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

Lauda is giving negative ratings to all sold accounts but it is OK when he did it back in 2013:

Read above.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

New negative trust has been given to Wendigo because of Lauda's rage, in my opinion wendigo made valid point:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=163375

Read Lauda's reference. Especially the highlighted part.

Quote from: fearofnegativeACC on November 15, 2017, 11:25:37 AM

with all these reasons above i will add extortion attempt https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1764757.0

Common theme.