Post
Topic
Board Reputation
Re: Chipmixer sponsor dangerous untrustworthy members and Racists and unfair treat?
by
Stedsm
on 28/04/2020, 16:11:41 UTC
I expect English is not your first language. This is not a ctiticism.

I'm from India and yes, I proudly say that English isn't my first language, but we still respect it and write the capital 'E'.

Quote
No. You'll have to define the member you are referring to. That would be the only possible way for me to answer your question.
The " volunteer" aspect I hope we have cleared up now.

Marlboroza I was referring to. You've been behind his back since I was watching the latest of the thread.

Quote
Your premise seems to be that I have some financial motivation for this thread.
That has been debunked conclusively since I have volunteered to wear their signature and all of the earnings can be directly sent to good causes or even donated to the forum for as many years as I post.

I got your point now, that even if you're not their part but just show their advertisement, you expect your "unofficial" earnings to be sent to the forum or to some good cause. Maybe I'm right now.  Cheesy

Quote
The purpose is as stated to ensure chipmixer has access to information regarding the behaviors of those members they are sponsoring.

That's good, but why not state these things to DarkStar first and then go to Chipmixer while you know that DarkStar is your way to reach them?

Quote
You probably should take some time to read the thread rather than rushing in hoping to say whatever you think could garner you favour with chipmixer that could potentially lead to you being allowed back on the chipmixer campaign.

For your info, I never ever topped their max posts even once since I was in their campaign. Was just in it because I loved their *no minimum posts" rule. Trust me, I'm not like those dying to get a spot in it (I never gave up and never misbehaved when removed out of the one and only highest paid campaign) and I'm not in a hurry to get into it as well. Wink

Quote
You must realise that most long term members have no need to sig spam. Any member that has been here pre 2017 and certainly pre 2014 should not need to wear sig scavenging btc via sig payments.
Best not to judge others by your own failures.

Are you a teacher? Because I'm getting a feeling that this is a class going on. Cheesy And my failure? Uh yeah, I just earned BTC but always spent it because I'm a spender and not a saving personality. I love to spend it as money, that's my point of view that you won't understand. Good for you though.

Quote
There are only 2 possibilities for pre 2014 members wearing sig to earn btc.

1. Total losers that just fucked up 2 huge bulls and are not wealthy.
2.  Greed.

I'm not wealthy, seriously. I just spent everything as I said.
Greed?! Umm yeah, somewhat. Cheesy I hope this satisfied your ego after hearing this.

Quote
Also once you define the member you are referring to ( why scared?) We will see analyse them in public...
I wonder if you will keep avoiding telling me which member you are specifically referring  to?

Told you above. But scared?! Neh, I don't even fear God now, just think where your "uncomplicated fear" comes in my mind. Wooaahh! Scared!  Roll Eyes

Quote
Hurry up, I don't wish to waste much time on those afraid to answer questions.

If you are too scared to answer ? Why join in?

Look up a bit again, you've got your answer already about that "afraid" part. Smiley

Quote
The fact you were removed, and posters like thepharmacist remain, is .....well you work it out.


I'm not jealous enough yet to figure it out, once I believe my mind is in such state, I'll definitely try to work it out. Thanks for the suggestion.