Quote from: dragonvslinux on October 19, 2019, 12:19:29 PM

I would very much appreciate references (evidence) with your response, given the situation with the out-of-date scam accusation.

Quote from: mosprognoz on October 19, 2019, 06:21:24 PM

[no references to scam accusation]

I knew deep down you were capable of providing references, I've seen it before, I'm proud of you. It goes to show what you can achieve when you put your mind to it

Now you've got 24 hours to put references to your wild accusations [archived] before I give you negative trust for unfounded accusations as a slanderous troll (with a reference).

That's a generous 72 hours in total to retract your accusations or provide references for your sources. In future, I'd recommend you don't make accusations before having the references, to avoid obvious slander (even if it is a big "hunch" you've got about a project).

This stuff is really simple for most people you know: Make an accusation, provide evidence. Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
Here's a reminder of the basic requirement for scam accusations, in case you forgot:

Quote from: escrow.ms on July 21, 2013, 05:28:05 PM

Reference Link:
[enter your reference link here]

You've made some serious accusations, now you have to provide evidence, or be labeled a slanderous troll.

Given it seems you still need some help identifying accurate sources, I'll entertain your deflection tactics, but only in order to try and help you with referencing.
Did you read the referencing beginners guide I linked you before? I think you should, I can see the basic issues you are having at the moment.
In order to not just patronise your incompetence, I thought I'd try and be helpful so I've included "Top Tips" regarding referencing & accusations.

Example 1

Quote from: mosprognoz on October 19, 2019, 06:21:24 PM

Because you supported that [edit*] from very beginning.

Quote from: dragonvslinux on October 15, 2019, 05:43:29 PM

Yes I have supported the development in the past.

*Slander removed

The reference clearly shows my contributions from March-May 2018 (specifically for successful Tails integration on Linux if you're interested, but I guess not), so not from the beginning, around 8 months since it's beginning in July 2017. My account wasn't registered here til September 2017, so that also seems somewhat unlikely. The reason I missed out on contributing to this project from the start is cos of ridiculous threads such as this one that made wild speculation about exit scams that as I've already proved, never happened Roll Eyes

Top Tip: When using references, always check that the reference in detail to what evidence it is providing. Don't exaggerate the claim in the reference. If you're not sure what the reference specifies, then avoid using it, it can otherwise be used against you to disprove your claim, and therefore make you look less credible. In this case, the reference has been used against you to disprove your claim. Oops.

Example 2

Quote from: mosprognoz on October 19, 2019, 06:21:24 PM

Now you are denying that it was a scam and promoting it by saying that deepsend is coming.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2057229.msg52745148#msg52745148

Hang on, why didn't you just quote what I said instead of link what I said, that's a bit odd isn't it? Oh wait, you were trying to exaggerate your claims again, makes sense now.
Let's read what I actually said:

Quote from: Referenced quote: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2057229.msg52745148#msg52745148 on October 13, 2019, 01:30:32 PM

I wonder what this feature is meant to be then Roll Eyes

[screenshot depicting a feature named "deepsend"]

Despite your deepest beliefs, It's currently in alpha testing, hence the screenshot.

Looks like I questioned Lauda to what the screenshot meant and claimed it was in alpha testing, ironically with a reference to back up such claims. See what I did there again, with the referencing?? And when did I say deepsend was coming? I said it was in alpha testing, not coming. I'd only say it's coming when it's in beta testing and I can see it working with my own eyes, not before. I deal in facts, not theories.

Top Tip: Don't assume that if someone is disproving a claim, they are promoting something, or claiming the public release of something. While hiding a quote behind a link can be sneaky at first, it'll only bite you in the ass when someone brings back the linked quote you are referencing to prove you wrong again. Same tip really, avoid exaggerating the truth.

Example 3

Quote from: mosprognoz on October 19, 2019, 06:21:24 PM

You are also claiming that deeponion is active project and never died. (Is that some kind of promotion ? The answer is YES)

Quote from: dragonvslinux on October 19, 2019, 04:38:37 PM

it doesn't need resurrecting as it never died

So Github are part of the conspiracy too as this project is dead and the development activity is a lie? You are hilarious!
Don't worry, I'm keeping a tally of the conspiring parties that so far includes; blockstats, blockexperts and now github. Anyone others you want to add to your claim?
For example, I believe that Bitcoin SV is still an active project, as do many others for that matter, so you think this is also promotion Huh

Top Tip: Seek medical attention for the possible psychosis you appear to be suffering from. I now believe you are delusional, not much else.

Quote from: mosprognoz on October 19, 2019, 06:21:24 PM

Quote from: dragonvslinux on October 19, 2019, 04:38:37 PM

If you could now please support the flag against me and put your (lack of) words where your mouth is:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=884

No I am not going to support that flag, because I do not think it is a correct one. Regarding tagging, the tag from Lauda is more than enough.

Quote from: theymos on June 12, 2019, 03:13:36 AM

If someone knowingly supports a flag containing incorrect fact-statements, then that is crystal-clear abuse.

So you think a tag from some who (you are implying) engages in crystal-clear abuse of the flag system is enough? Wow, great standards you've got there!
For the record I'd appreciate you tagging me, given Lauda's lack of trust as well as relevance these days. Do you know where Lauda went anyway? I miss them and their one liners Cry

Quote from: Lauda regarding BSV on October 18, 2019, 03:24:26 PM

This thread has become boring because of too much evidence.

Maybe you should consider spending more time here due to lack of evidence then? Just a suggestion Wink