Quote from: Bazinga442 on April 24, 2018, 04:32:45 PM

Quote from: Lauda on April 24, 2018, 07:39:39 AM

Quote from: maeusi on April 24, 2018, 05:49:01 AM

ALU was involved.

No. You really need to stop posting lies about Untold and me.

It is not a lie. It states clearly on the Bitblisscoin.com bounty thread that ALU was involved. Deny it all you want but you were in the know.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2709575.0

Strange, good observation; also I came across this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3293588.msg34366963#msg34366963

It was posted on 10th April and I believe that ALU had already placed him on temporary suspension (dunno what happened next) Huh

; but still he claimed that rewards was assessed by ALU.

So, either Lauda is lying about suspending him or aTriz is; I would like to believe its the latter. I am astonished by this blatant contradiction/lie being peddled by aTriz; looks like he is a pathological liar and surprisingly none of the so very intelligent spam/scam detectives were aware of his actions. Possibly siding/boot-licking DTs helps with this.

Also; I did skim through quite a number of his campaigns and nearly all of his campaigns had this verbatim :

Rewards
The rewards will be determined by ALU and you will be paid in 3 different stages like such -
Standard: 1 Stakes
Complementary: 3 Stakes
Exceptional: 5 Stakes

So, I dunno what Lauda meant by this :

Quote from: Lauda on April 08, 2018, 08:13:21 AM

There is no such thing as an "ALU-project". It was solely managed by aTriz and nobody was aware of any of this. It was listed like any other project that one of us has worked on, nothing special.

P.S. Has aTriz made good on his promises, if not then I hate to admit it; but RedX is apparently correct and actmyname is wrong; he was only looking for a second chance for a possible long con.

Quote from: actmyname on April 11, 2018, 03:57:06 AM

Quote from: RedX on April 11, 2018, 03:23:00 AM

I don't think that's fair. aTriz isn't asking for any redemption. Sure, you can detect themes of that there but they're trying (at least from what I can tell) [to the best of their ability] to rectify the situation with the Scam ICO's.

There's no more need to throw any criticism out therethe negative trust will stick for some time. This isn't some half-assed attempt to try and garner favor, I'm sure.