Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 37 results by BharatDEX
Re: [ANN][ICO]Gold Mining Asset|Digitizing Gold Assets: Crypto-Based Gold Token
I just received my reward.
4 waves for arround 100.000 goldma tokens.
Would they not exclude in the first quater the big wallets holding 380 million coins it would be just 0.2 waves ($0.4) reward for 6 months when holding (100.000 goldma tokens ($13.000 main ico price)
What a disaster the team is trying everything to hide their stupidity with poor manipulation attempts.
4 waves for arround 100.000 goldma tokens.
Would they not exclude in the first quater the big wallets holding 380 million coins it would be just 0.2 waves ($0.4) reward for 6 months when holding (100.000 goldma tokens ($13.000 main ico price)
What a disaster the team is trying everything to hide their stupidity with poor manipulation attempts.
Re: [ANN][ICO]Gold Mining Asset|Digitizing Gold Assets: Crypto-Based Gold Token
I warned about these scammers a long time ago.They just keep changing the whitepaper and their terms even the ICO ended.
These are scammers who are trying massivly to hide their greed.
Sent you a Private Message
These are scammers who are trying massivly to hide their greed.
Sent you a Private Message
This one clearly hasn't so why does he get bashed to implement them?
This was answered in the first post:
Dude... stop paying spammers, problem solved.
IT'S YOUR FUCKING JOB TO DEAL WITH THIS. You're abusing the forum by flooding it with spam and now you want the "community" to do the work for you for free. GTFO.
IT'S YOUR FUCKING JOB TO DEAL WITH THIS. You're abusing the forum by flooding it with spam and now you want the "community" to do the work for you for free. GTFO.
Increasing merit requirements and negative trust have nothing to do with spam. That's BS
Quote
If you aren't getting accepted to a high paid campaign, it is because there are other people who, in the eyes of the manager of said campaign, are making better posts than you and are taking the available slots. If you want to be accepted to a high paid campaign, then you should examine your own posting behaviors and seek to improve them.
How can they know it when not checking my content but denying because of merit, negative trust or anything else but not for content?
Quote
Some campaigns have a merit requirements or a trust requirement. This is entirely at the discretion of the manager of said campaign. If you don't like these metrics, then you are free to not apply to campaigns which stipulate said metrics.
This one clearly hasn't so why does he get bashed to implement them? Putting all low ranked members into general suspicion?
maybe you can point me to the rules where it says that the privilege to participate in signature campaigns need to be earned
Perhaps you could point to the rule which says that every member who joins this forum has a right to display a signature and participate in a signature campaign, regardless of how much they spam or how low value their posts are?No one has the right to even hold an account on this forum, let alone a signature or be part of a campaign. If you break the rules, your privileges will be removed, be that a signature ban or an account ban.
So you wanna say people who didn't get accepted on high paid campaigns broke the forum rules and that's why they are not being accepted?
Or is it because of the low earned amount of merit, negative trust, and other stupid metrics?
Has Lauda more rights than a newly registered user on that forum per forum rules?
Re: general suspicion on all forum members being scammers and spammers
@theymos I put clearly local rules on my thread.
These DT members are clearly breaking forum rules demanding at the same time to uphold the forum rules from anybody else and even Staff ignoring it.
The report button useless.
Is that the equal enforcing of rules on bitcointalk ?
These people are breaking forum rule 26 and nobody gives a shit.
These DT members are clearly breaking forum rules demanding at the same time to uphold the forum rules from anybody else and even Staff ignoring it.
The report button useless.
Is that the equal enforcing of rules on bitcointalk ?
These people are breaking forum rule 26 and nobody gives a shit.
Re: general suspicion on all forum members being scammers and spammers
Quote from: theymos on January 10, 2015, 10:10:58 PM
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
@to the inexperienced staff which I basically should ignore. On Meta, you can't create self-moderated topic Mr. Brain
Quote
Those were mostly replaced by self-moderated topics, but local rules can be enforced at the moderator's discretion.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0
Quote
26. Local thread rules, if stated properly when the thread was started, specific enough and don't conflict with the forum rules, have to be followed.[e]
@to the inexperienced staff which I basically should ignore. On Meta, you can't create self-moderated topic Mr. Brain
Having no merit earned doesn't mean you post low quality.
Not an absolute measure perhaps but it does to a high degree, particularly as a ratio of merit-to-post count.
And your claim that the privilege needs to be earned is total nonsense.
But since you are such a good DT member who wouldn't make up lies maybe you can point me to the rules where it says that the privilege to participate in signature campaigns need to be earned and that this claim is not made up by a small group of idiots
Waiting for your response where I doubt you will link to that rule which you claim exist.
But since you are such a good DT member who wouldn't make up lies maybe you can point me to the rules where it says that the privilege to participate in signature campaigns need to be earned and that this claim is not made up by a small group of idiots
Waiting for your response where I doubt you will link to that rule which you claim exist.
You need to earn a certain rank to be able to use certain features in you signature, making it suitable for advertising. And forum admins (and global mods nowadays) can take it away in a heartbeat if you break the rules in a particularly egregious way. Sounds very much like a privilege that needs to be earned.
A forum rank has in the majority of accounts nothing to do with earned merit.
Quote
Not an absolute measure perhaps but it does to a high degree, particularly as a ratio of merit-to-post count.
You just admitted you accept a high-grade of collateral.So you basicly give a fuck to the other high amount of forum members who gets unfairly treaten by that campaign rule.
My claim is that Lauda and the others are forcing people to accept these kinds of campaigns by excluding them from all other campaigns.
This is a fact nobody can deny.
Or do you claim that people who have not x amount of merit earned are automatically scammers and spammers who shouldn't be accepted into campaigns?
Also, negative trust is for users who scammed or are going to scam.
Voicing my opinion about Lauda is not a scam that would legitimate destroying my account.
This is a fact nobody can deny.
Or do you claim that people who have not x amount of merit earned are automatically scammers and spammers who shouldn't be accepted into campaigns?
Also, negative trust is for users who scammed or are going to scam.
Voicing my opinion about Lauda is not a scam that would legitimate destroying my account.
People who are not able to your fucking moronic standards are not automatically spammers.
You are fucking idiots who automatically put anybody into a scammer and spammer category which doesn't fit your so-called moronic standards which majority doesn't agree with
You are fucking idiots who automatically put anybody into a scammer and spammer category which doesn't fit your so-called moronic standards which majority doesn't agree with
You implicitly agree with forum rules by posting here and spam, low value posts, plagiarism, etc is against the rules. And signature advertising is a privilege that needs to be earned and not abused.
Having no merit earned doesn't mean you post low quality.
And your claim that the privilege needs to be earned is total nonsense.
But since you are such a good DT member who wouldn't make up lies maybe you can point me to the rules where it says that the privilege to participate in signature campaigns need to be earned and that this claim is not made up by a small group of idiots
Waiting for your response where I doubt you will link to that rule which you claim exist.
general suspicion on all forum members being scammers and spammers
A group of DT members installed on bitcointalk general suspicion on all forum members being scammers and spammers who don't fit their moronic standards being able to earn commissions on signature campaigns.
Theymos you claim you want bitcointalk to be as much as a possible decentralized forum where people won't be able to get abused.
How does it come you allow these DT members to enforce their own rule putting all forum members who don't fit their moronic standards being put automatically equal to spammers and scammers?
Local rule only theymos is being allowed to reply to this thread which I doubt he has the balls to do so when reading old threads on Meta.
Theymos you claim you want bitcointalk to be as much as a possible decentralized forum where people won't be able to get abused.
How does it come you allow these DT members to enforce their own rule putting all forum members who don't fit their moronic standards being put automatically equal to spammers and scammers?
Local rule only theymos is being allowed to reply to this thread which I doubt he has the balls to do so when reading old threads on Meta.
So you destroy my account for voicing my opinion on your bash and shitty campaign standards to exclude the majority of forum users from better-paid campaigns throwing at the same time the claim that with lower pay rates people are forced to spam?
You are the reason the majority of forum users have to accept these kinds of campaigns because of your shitty standards to control all campaigns which are being paid via BTC.
You are clearly a piece of shit trying to destroy my account for voicing my opinion on your bash.
Being lucky to have my account destroyed you peace of shit who needs to hide behind TOR and being fully anonym you scared pussy
Btw where is my BCH you stole from me and many other forum members?
You are the reason the majority of forum users have to accept these kinds of campaigns because of your shitty standards to control all campaigns which are being paid via BTC.
You are clearly a piece of shit trying to destroy my account for voicing my opinion on your bash.
Being lucky to have my account destroyed you peace of shit who needs to hide behind TOR and being fully anonym you scared pussy
Btw where is my BCH you stole from me and many other forum members?
Right now i only see a group of dumbasses trying to force him to play by their inside rules to exclude the majority of current posters and being hypocritical claiming that these posters spam because of low payment rate but at the same time make it impossible for them to join better-paid campaigns.
Spammers get accepted into stake campaign because they can't qualify to higher-paid campaigns that have higher standards. That doesn't make it right for stake to subsidize the spam. This is a forum, not a billboard.
I bet if you were a city planner you would argue the street needs to be removed to make way for more ads:
https://s.hdnux.com/photos/34/12/62/7384228/3/rawImage.jpg
People who are not able to your fucking moronic standards are not automatically spammers.
You are fucking idiots who automatically put anybody into a scammer and spammer category which doesn't fit your so-called moronic standards which majority doesn't agree with
Quote
legit campaign manager
Why do you call Steve a non-legit manager?This is getting ridicoulous.
Could I argue that this spam is scamming my brain and thus properly tag the people behind it? 
That would be within the new guidelines.
It has been almost a full 4 months since this was fully brought up, with little to no improvement whatsoever. Changes =/= improvements. That would be within the new guidelines.The main incompetent user on this forum who is doing the most harm to this forum is you Lauda and nobody else.
Noone ranks near you.
You already proofed your professionalism by stealing peoples BCH as an escrow.
Quote
legit campaign manager
Why do you call Steve a non-legit manager?
Right now i only see a group of dumbasses trying to force him to play by their inside rules to exclude the majority of current posters and being hypocritical claiming that these posters spam because of low payment rate but at the same time make it impossible for them to join better-paid campaigns.
You guys are pathetic
Re: Hhampuz embezzling signature campaign funds from BestMixer
BIG Hhampuz covering his ass ........... Hahaha
Wasn't he a big mouth when somebody accused him of promoting illegal casinos?
Now sitting silent and covering his ass?
Wasn't he a big mouth when somebody accused him of promoting illegal casinos?
Now sitting silent and covering his ass?
Quote
Please note: You as a campaign will not be warned or have your signatures removed for having a handful of low quality posters on your campaign especially if they're quickly dealt with. We accept that no campaign will be able to stop spam 100% of the time but these guidelines are there for the campaigns where it becomes blatantly obvious they are doing little to nothing at all to try prevent spam and are happily paying people to post rubbish continually even after a warning. Please monitor your users closely and there should be no issues.
Stake opened a thread for reporting them and is dealing quickly with it.
So where is the issue?
There was at least one episode where you "woke up" after a lengthy period of inactivity and excluded (in your trust list) a number of users who happened to be targets of Quickseller's attacks. That will probably keep raising doubts despite the signed message.
If you're now planning to stick around for a while you should review your trust list as it has a different impact than it used to. If you're planning to go inactive again you should consider clearing the list out.
If you're now planning to stick around for a while you should review your trust list as it has a different impact than it used to. If you're planning to go inactive again you should consider clearing the list out.
What probably happened was I logged in, saw that I had a zillion PMs, then went through them and responded accordingly. I did get quite a few PMs from various people advising me to add so-and-so to my Trust, or exclude someone from it. I didn't really feel like going back and doing months worth of research on the matter, so I probably just made the changes based on whether I liked the sender of the PM. That's why there may have been a bunch of changes on a certain date. Sorry, it's not quite as exciting as the theory of QS being in control of this acct
Anyway, that method of curating my Trust list isn't very scientific or objective, so I'll consider your last bit of advice. However, I'd have to weigh the consequences a bit more carefully before I do.
You did not really answer the question in RED above.
You specifically kicked well-trusted users off of DT1/DT2 based on QS's or OG's PM's, huh?
Why don't you ask that same question to LFC-Bitcoin ?
Do you have double standards when Lauda is doing it?
Quote
The main purpose of this forum is NOT making a buck of signature campaigns. I hope you are aware of that. If you are not you are welcome to leave
That's why you use chipmixer . Because it's a low paying offer heh?
The exclusion of participants in any decent campaign forces them to accept shitty campaigns like stake.
You are the main issue people are spamming on these low-quality campaigns.
Demanding for themselves a better pay to not be forced to spam but post only quality content but at the same time deny access to the majority of participants to be able to earn a decent commission without being forced to spam.
You are a hypocrite like the rest of you
BTW maybe you can point me as DT member who is attacking Stake a rule which he broke?
Because I can't find it.