Well, I stopped playing. But he reached out again, trying to make amends. Based on the fact that this is such a simple task to do, just claim and transfer. In combination with the potential leaderboard prices that I would split (so he had an incentive to not scam because those would be possibly several thousands), I thought he would have much more to lose if he scammed me again. Apaprently he did not and therefore scammed again. Of course I could still go for those leaderboard prices, but my current grudge against him is so big that I won't (like last time that is).

Correct, we had a deal.

We even came to a new deal, a third chance a week ago, I would get 100% of the comission and possible leaderboard payouts would be split. I also think it's a bad attitude to blame victims. Doesn't matter how naive someone is, as a human being you should never scam that person.

Regarding the new deal, here is this:

Hi, yeah, I mean I am still waiting for the first proof against me. Apart from that, I am at certain sites pretty well known as an honorous member (rollbit, stake), so maybe you ever heard of a Maltese Falcon there. Regarding the link, you are right, but I really have no clue how to do this. But more important, he and I worked things out so maybe the road aint that smooth, the result is ok.

I just want to make you guys aware of the following person.
He is known at these sites, probably at others too.

Stake: SweetL0u
BTC talk: SweetL0u
Shuffle: SweetLou
BJFUN: SweetLou
Reddit: SweetLoup

He got a stake of 500, also promised to give me a precentage of the ref money. But he ended up paying only 100$ back from the 1.25k that it currently is.

Here is proof that he has no intention of paying me back.

https://www.mediafire.com/view/c1ofxxvyvgc9aak/scamlou2.jpg/file

Currently the team is pretty small I think, so that's the main reason. However let's hope that if the site grows, the staff also grows, but for now people need to be a bit more patient to have their case handled.

Man, I have been doing that now, go look at it. Its also neutral. The current feedback is accurate however.

I did not make any mistake, you are victim blaming and I will tag you for that! If you understand that what you do is wrong, I will remove it.

Lucky? Why am I lucky? I did nothing wrong! So no reason for any accusations. The point of the whole thing is that they can't give out feedback like that that is based on nothing! I will maybe revise it from negative to neutral, maybe that would be more appropriate, but the issue persists, not seeing that I did nothing wrong and I don't have to proof anything (that is actually what my feedback currently is). If they agree with my point, send me a dm or whatever and admit that they acted hasty and hopefully that they use their brain the next time when they make accusations, then I will remove it completely.

Thank you for the first part. of your Post, regarding the second half, you should have stayed away.
The details I provided: they make false accusations, there you go. The evidence I can provide is the lack of evidence for their accusation. So if they have no proof they should stfu, if they are working on it, feel free to announce here and we will all wait longer for them to provide it.
Seems it is not against the forum guidelines to ban people for false accusations, thank you for pointing that out, that I learned from some of your colleagues too. I also learned therefore this whole forum is a muppet show, seeing that false accusations are allowed, while still putting red flags on sites and users (not saying they don't deserve it, read my words carefully)?
So maybe see it as a suggestion, to improve the quality of this forum even if it is not in your guidelines? I said things that proved the point I was making and changed to an accurate one (regarding rikafip), but if I call someone an idiot for being an idiot, man then you all need to grow up and become smarter and accept the truth (but that is very difficult).

Well, I personally would like to see making false accusations a bannable offence, I can't proof it, but neither can they proof the initial claim (so they should just refrain from accusing people), it STARTS with them. However I realized in the meantime that ain't a possibility on this forum, although then I also see no reason for red flags etc, wrongly accusing people is really bad, same category as just scamming. Because of that strange ruling here it should be: give them as much negative trust for the idiots they are, in the hope that people actually understand the points I made. But even that is a big issue seeing how a lot of people don't see what is wrong with what they did. (but I guess that is an overall humanity problem)
I made more than enough the point that they can't just throw out accusations, but I can't help it if they (and a lot of other people) don't get that, so what else can I do? I also advice you to just look at what I did and what the conclusion of jollygood and scamvirus are, one not only tagging but also leaving negative feedback in the case of jollygood.

They made false accusations without proof, aint that something wrong? Clearly it ain't something wrong here (because that is the ideology of the forum), but man, the fact that you as a human being don't see this as wrong?

aint that also a bit the easy way? I mean, there have to be people who fight for the right thing no?

+100

I agree, but in this case I got accused (jollygood made a nice negative feedback about it, being called a sock puppet, scamvirus saying the same that I am part of them, must be shilling whatever, without the negative feedback in his case) of something while there is no proof of me being part of their company or whatever (and I know that proof for that claim doesn't exist, because I am not part of them). And that is something that goes against my principles.

It ain't because you didn't leave me negative feedback, that I shouldn't call you out for your BS reasoning.

And yes it's very accurate now, every person that doesn't understand the fact that I have no obligation to proof (I mean I actually can't disproof his claim about me being a "sock puppet", because like I said, the wallet might be a company wallet), so nice world you want to live in.

Exactly, I didn't shill, I have no signature campaign. I came here because I had an issue. Could I still be this "sock puppet" yes, but does signing those things make any difference? NO
And like you do, just don't give me any feedback unless you can prove that I am actually that "sock puppet".


Regarding this, I didnt use a third party service or anything. But I hope people are smart enough to understand what I did. (but you have to look at the time of the message/post and the time of the transaction although it's also highly remarkable that after more than a yar that address became suddenly active while I became active here). But I repeat, I shouldn't be doing it and it even doesn't lead to anything, might as well be a company wallet, but with your practice how many innocents would end up in jail because of your "feeling".

GUYS I PROVIDED PROOF THAT I AM THE OWNER!!!!!!!!!!!! go look
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5436623.new#new

Man, is it too difficult to read. look at my previous post.
I announced I would empty the address BEFORE I did it, I even said to which address.


SO I PROVIDED THE EVIDENCE THAT I AM THE OWNER, SO WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?

I did an alternative thing to prove it is my wallet I finally succumbed to all the critic. You can find it in the other thread.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5436623.new#new
I made a post about a transaction before it was confirmed on the chain.
(but I also think they are ignorant for just throwing out accusations, see the fallacy I posted, it's not because I didn't sign that it automatically is not my address)
Oh and for the record, first jollygood requested a transaction ID (which I provided) but then it was needs to sign. So again now, I provided proof that the address is mine, but do you think they will now believe that it is my address? For all I know they say I am now one of the company, and it's just a company address, so normal I have access to it. So there will never be 100% proof that it is mine, but they just can't throw out these bullshit reasonings.

It all originates from the following sentence:
If I sign the address then the address is mine.
I did not sign the address, but you guys jump making conclusions.
This is a fallacy and if you don't believe me.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Denying-the-Antecedent
So as you can see it's normal logic, but if you don't have the capacity to understand this, better go back to school idiots.