Quote from: Timelord2067 on Today at 01:17:19 AM

Summary:
It's very likely every UID on that page is a sock puppet generating noise.
GBGglenn was identified by @marlboroza as running a ponzi on 2018-07-17 using this link: http://archive.is/4GzpT

I have not verified the assertion marlboroza makes, however it is unlikely Hasbro, the owners of the Monopoly Trade Mark would launch an ICO via this forum.

You read my mind, thank you. If you don't mind, I added your post to the evidence: AMEPAY/ANN Bumping

Quote from: Timelord2067 on Today at 01:17:19 AM

The example you gave is a fairly routine example (which we appreciate) of fake noise generated by sock puppets.

As you can see, this is already the seventh project, the thread of which is being deleted by the moderators, you may think that this is not a significant contribution, but I do it only when I have time. So as a DT member you can join by taking a few minutes to leave feedback to OP Amepay.

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on Today at 10:46:13 AM

I would like to ask the manager of the company @CryptopreneurBrainboss, is the participation of two alternative accounts allowed?

The owner of different accounts cannot be tagged unless the alts are part of the same bounty, as the rules do not prohibit the use of multiple accounts. Evidence of abuse can serve as a basis for neg'trust feedback, if the proof includes at least something from this list. Wink

Quote

Alts / members of one bounty campaign (taken from one spreadsheet + links to proof).
Snapshot / Archive, (identified wallet address and bitcointalk profile).
Snapshot / Archive, (transaction linking accounts + link to Txns).

Judging by the data, in this particular case: Neg feedback