Since your keeping count of these things, a few new flags I've noticed with a
lack of proper referencing.
I even tried to
correct the reference for Example 1 flag but was effectively over ruled by a DT member (as linked above).
1.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=884Note: Supported by Lauda and another DT2 member, opposed by two DT1 members and two DT2 members
(withdrawn)2.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=886Note: Same reference problem as Example 1 and supported by Lauda
(withdrawn)3.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=709Note: Same refrence problem as Example 1 and supported by Lauda
(inactive/active*)This is also the same referencing problem as previously mentioned:
49 Active. Lauda flagged deeperx (type 1, see why). Supported by Lauda, LFC_Bitcoin, Avirunes, TheUltraElite, Hhampuz, micgoossens, mosprognoz, N0sferatu. Opposed by [quote edit: Real-Duke, bykardinal, youngwebs, dreamhouse, USBitcoinServices.Com, escapefrom3dom, ja23, dvy, SEELE^^01, longlivecapitalism, bizul, deeperx, Porfirii, shyreenjao27, dragonvslinux, bbvedf, bystander_sss, Nico1994, Sulfurath, nezero, biticoin, iDogLover, kk80586, kenji1286, Alter101, dontrundll32, Nomar][/size]. - @Lutpin (not @Lauda) gives merit to the thread this Flag and the following flag cite. The thread goes for 117 pages, so there is clearly substance to it with crypto-rainbow (following Flag) being cited in the OP, however, in one of those TL;DR moments, I can't find the accused
@deeperx mentioned in the first page of the thread.
Probably just due to the following though:
A glitch in the matrix,
*credit