xtraelv
You have edited your post. I continue:
You have edited your post. I continue:
My post was edited well before you made your post.
1.) In the first post, I showed big donors of merit for Smart man. Why are they all banned for plagiarism/another abuse and sent merits to users banned for plagiarism/another abuse? Can there be so many coincidences?
Here is another scheme of merit flow. Please note that most users are also banned for plagiarism. You can check it through BPIP.
Most of the users who wrote in the Smart man topic either is on this scheme or are directly connected with it. Again coincidences?
Here is another scheme of merit flow. Please note that most users are also banned for plagiarism. You can check it through BPIP.
Most of the users who wrote in the Smart man topic either is on this scheme or are directly connected with it. Again coincidences?
In the absence of concrete proof it is a co-incidence. It doesn't make it untrue. It makes it unproven.
There are serious issues with jumping to conclusions based on merit data. See for yourself:
In the absence of other proof it can lead to all sorts of false allegations.
2.) Just check his topic. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2058283.0 Many examples 1 2 3 etc.
Note in the thread a lot of dialogs like:
- Wrote to you in PM.
-Thank you, answered, we will work.
-Good! I agree it.
- Fine, I'm waiting.
-I sent you new documentation.
-Got it, work.
Very funny, do real customers behave like this?
Note in the thread a lot of dialogs like:
- Wrote to you in PM.
-Thank you, answered, we will work.
-Good! I agree it.
- Fine, I'm waiting.
-I sent you new documentation.
-Got it, work.
Very funny, do real customers behave like this?
This is common shitposter behavior. It is dealt with by reporting the post to the moderator and getting it deleted and if the user does it enough times they get banned.
Where is the proven link to Smart man ?
Without concrete proof it is a mere allegation. While some people may place feedback based on allegations. Most won't.
3.) Please do it. It is very important.
Unfortunately I have decided not to look into that actual allegation of whether that project is a scam because the thread is largely run by circle jerkers that have hijacked a number of threads and made a number of unsupported scam accusations against various projects. Any rational discussion in the thread automatically assumes that you promote what is probably a scam. So rational discussion of fact is near impossible. I am neither interested in being seen as a "promoter" of what is probably a scam nor getting brain cancer from arguing with idiots..
I have seen no proof that Smart man is the instigator of the scam rather than a misguided investor or bounty manager.
4.) Ha ha. There is no evidence that the spam service produces spam? OK.
Calling something a spam service is not evidence of spam. It is circular logic.