Legendary has been with us since April 12, 2014. The profile (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=313016) shows a bit more than 9,000 posts and about 2,000 in merit, with activity this month as well. There is no bio. What you see here is the thread rules, the auctions, and the trading. In your opening post, you made it plain you have never scammed anyone and that you are for a clean house, even going so far as to tell others to lock down their accounts. Some have said they will hold you to that.

Yet you made an issue of the admin.

Take Dec 2, 2021. You put in writing that Theymos would have saved a lot of money from scammers had he implemented 2FA years ago. Hardly a subtle way to call him out. The day before, you told bidders not to bid unless they secured their account, and certainly not to look for reimbursement in the event of an account takeover or MITM. You were clear you wouldn’t cover a loss from an unsecured account. So why is the bidder in one instance and on Theymos in the next?

In that same vein, you decried the new forum software as a scam and the SMF setup as a joke, directed at him since he commissioned the work. I have to ask why you used that word.

You also took pity on those with Donator status, saying if you held the rank you would want it to read “Scammed By the Forum.” That is a rank he bestows. He has gone out of his way to point out that donations are general support, not a guarantee of new software. Why put it in those terms?

You still do business here, and in the opening post you called it a well-known scamming forum while professing to want none of the nonsense. Why target Theymos and the donors on a site you continue to use? Do you stand by what you wrote and the call-out, or should an apology be forthcoming?

Been going through the late-September threads instead of the quote walls. Putting down what the posts actually contain, point by point.

Bitbollo (Legendary, joined August 2014, activity around 4130, merit around 5106, about 12,800 posts) opened topic 5594694 on 21 September about frogbet and the campaign run by Little Mouse. Public version of that dispute: a deposit on 14 September got converted into a bonus with heavy wagering after a free spin, the review reward was not paid on the stated schedule, he was told 24 hours, a week passed, escrow that had been held for the campaign was sent back, and the casino side later said roughly $100 had been credited on the site. He filed flags and left negative trust over the handling and the continued promotion. Amount was small. That part is a campaign and deposit argument, written up in 5594694 and 5594724.

Seven days later, 28 September, topic 5595318 opens under the title that he is a scammer, ponzi promoter, account trader, cheater and abuser. The arguments under that title do not hold up. Here is why.

1. Timing. The heavy title only shows up after he filed the frogbet complaint and the flags. The address overlap those posts rely on was already public in December 2016 (Avirunes note naming bitbollo, Cs87kxy and Cearea11). Nothing stuck to the Legendary account then. It gets reused now, a week after the campaign dispute.

2. One old address is not control of another account. The load-bearing link is 14A8fkAAv2yaLJUBU5Nb82QWTtpPSYFPp2. Cs87kxy posted it on 19 June 2015 in a signature-campaign signup. Bitbollo posted the same string on 12 August 2015 next to 1BoSH7RisUAPpGfNbX8scSB43YP6Tx3g7M and 1JwLxS3za2s9gFVzn4SKk6xpgg24bxxh9d. In 2015 addresses were pasted into contests, quoted, and reused in giveaways. Posting a string someone else already posted does not show who held the key in 2016 or 2017, when the other account picked up its negative trust.

3. Exchange hot wallets are shared. Later posts point at both sides sending toward a cex.io hot wallet. A hot wallet receives deposits from thousands of customers. Shared traffic into an exchange wallet is not proof the keys are controlled by one person. Deposit addresses and hot wallets get mixed traffic all the time.

4. No proceeds TXID. Bitbollo has said in the thread that 1BoSH7RisUAPpGfNbX8scSB43YP6Tx3g7M is a long-used address he can sign for, that those addresses have years of ordinary exchange activity, and that he wants a TXID of scheme proceeds hitting them. Across the pages of 5595318 that TXID is not produced. What gets shown is old posts, co-spending into exchange infrastructure, and a list of DirectBet tipster addresses. Negative feedback for the boostcrypto thread (exit in about a week, trust note March 2017, “ponzi scammer”) and for account sales sits on Cs87kxy, not on the Legendary account.

5. DirectBet and account sales do not carry the title. The tipster rules linked in the accusation allowed a few entries per player. Account buying and selling was ordinary marketplace traffic on this board in 2015–2016. Neither of those, on the posts cited, turned into a red tag on bitbollo at the time.

6. Record after the old posts. Merit and activity accumulated across the decade after 2015. He has run the Bitcoin collectibles meetups (Milan, Catania, Tokyo, Seoul dates in topic 5503159), free drinks and open invite, merited by long-standing members. That is the visible activity, not a hidden scheme tied to a satoshi trace.

I went through the cited posts, the June and August 2015 address dates, the 2016 note, the trust entries on the other account, and the transaction claims in 5595318. No post in that thread shows scheme proceeds entering an address Bitbollo has used in the open for more than ten years. The charges in the title are not established by the material that was posted.

Shishir99 only started digging after Bitbollo left him a negative on the 21st. He said that himself on the 30th. The frogbet thing was a missed reward and a deposit, about a hundred bucks. Hours later, he opens 5594724 quoting the trust note. A week later, 5595318 shows up with the long title, and under it is a 2015 address plus a note from 2016 that never got bitbollo a tag. No tx of bad coins hitting an address he has used in the open for ten years. That is a reply to the feedback, not a new case. Bitbollo is innocent. Not a scammer, not a ponzi promoter, not an account trader, not a cheater, not an abuser. Bitbollo is innocent of the accusations that he is a scammer, a ponzi promoter, an account trader, a cheater, or an abuser.

A review of DireWolfM14’s https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2003859 public record shows he has made use of “retard,” “retarded” and the like as an insult repeatedly. He has been a member since April 4, 2018, and his profile contains 6,856 posts spread across 344 pages. I didn't include “retort” or any quotes from others because private messages and anything he deleted don't show up on the profile.

I reviewed his history to determine whether his use of those words was an isolated error or part of a pattern. The answer is obvious; it is a pattern.

That is significant. We are not talking about mere antiquated vocabulary here. Educators, the medical community, disability groups, and society at large have put aside this kind of terminology for good reason, having found it offensive and stigmatizing to those with intellectual disabilities.

Members of Bitcointalk may have their differences. One can denounce an argument as wrong, dishonest, or ridiculous without having to degrade people with intellectual disabilities.

Examine the dates and the repetition in his posts and form your own opinion: is it right to humiliate fellow members with slurs?

Well, sorry for being kinda rude. I probably worded it pretty badly. Which I edited out now, and I expect you to remove it from your quote as well.

It's evident an AI post that you write in just 5 minutes. It's strange that you denying now. Yes sure you can write like one page of text including formatting and quote .
Only loan seekers believe in you. "casually". 
From now on, we have literally nothing to talk anymore - ignoring you is the best answer.

Thanks!
It's been over a week already; I think most people who trust bitbollo and other people who are regular on the reputation board have already noticed the thread about bitbollo. The main purpose of mentioning their name wasn't to notify them, but to show how bitbollo is doing with his DT power, which is supposed to come with some responsibility. As for the people who's name I mentioned, they are already aware of this case. If they felt disturbed due to my mentions, I apologise for that.

As for my post #5, I think I was on topic, and I am pretty sure about it. If OP feels this was excessive, he could remove my post since it is self-moderated.

Second page. After the manager opened another slot (which is page 4), an application was submitted from Cossyblack. Does anyone believe in such coincidences? Take the address from page 2, supposedly by chance, and fill out the application on page 5?
https://loyce.club/archive/posts/6651/66511915.html

What's the implication here?
As far as I can see no one in DT left negative feedback as a result of this thread. Trust list exclusions are personal and don't have to be related to deals.

No one seems to be taking the accusation too seriously but the fallback that followed resulted in exclusions from trust lists. But in any case, there's no particular value in being part of DT. It's more of a responsibility if anything. The outcome is pretty satisfactory for both sides I reckon. No big consequences, only some damage gets corrected.

Case closed now? Or will we continue the Streisand effect? 

...

...

I blame @shishi99 for his eyeservice job that did not allow him to know that copying someone application is a normal thing that people do, anyways, his is a case for another day.

Agreed.  There are numerous DT1 Trolls who slap negatives or tildas for reasons other than what gets waved about by those same good people when they want to take the moral high ground.

My tildas was in line with the *cough* rule that I don't trust their trust feedback.

For example:


It goes on:  (No reference)

---

---

TL; DR.

Deescalate.  

How many days/weeks/months/years would you continue?
This is the way you are showing to be trustworthy and my trust was wrong right? Did you think that trying to ruin my reputation, continuing to posting dozens of fake accusation, and create a retard topic has helped users scammed by frogbet or the dozens of website that have scammed here on forum?

bitbollo is a scammer, ponzi promoter, account trader, cheater, and abuser.


What I should comment about keys that are in my possession since 13 years and never linked to any scam and used with CEX KYC?
You continue to skip my evidence and explanations with a completely delirant accusation... but ok, this demonstrate how these guys keep care of community and want to fight scam.
Meanwhile the current scam section is floaded, as demonstrated in my scam accusation, they find really useful spent 5 topics/dozens of page by spreading this bullshit.


No I am not this account " oneadvocate " but thanks for having the doubt I have a full time life dedicate about these crappy non-sense accusations.

edit: in the last 2 weeks @OP has quoted or mentioned my username 144 times .

If the accusation @bitbollo needs to clear his name from is trust abuse, maybe @bitbollo you can simply remove trust ratings that aren't related to dealings involving exchanges of goods/services/money changing hands?

If doing deals here makes you reliable, and since we can see DT members are doing a favour to not add ratings based on bad dealings from years ago, maybe it shouldn't be the case that trust ratings are added based on personal matters that have nothing to do with actual trustworthiness.

ডিটি নেটওয়ার্কে পারটিসিপেট করার মতো কোন ইচ্ছাই আমার ছিলো না। যেহেতু ফোরামে ডিটি নেটওয়ার্ক কিছুটা বায়াসড বলে আমি মনে করি, আমি আমার সিদ্ধান্ত পরিবর্তন করেছি এবং আমি আমার নিজের ট্রাস্ট লিস্ট বিল্ড করেছি। আমি আপনাদের সবাইকে অনুরোধ করবো যে আপনারাও আপনাদের নিজেদের ট্রাস্ট লিস্ট বিল্ড করুন। আপনি ডিটি নেটওয়ার্কে যাওয়ার আগ অব্দি আপনার কথার কোন ভ্যালু কেউ দিবে না, যেমন আমার কথার ভ্যালু কেউ দিচ্ছে না এই মুহূর্তে। আমি কখনো অন্যায়ের বিরুদ্ধে বা ইনজাস্টিস এর বিরুদ্ধে চুপ থাকতে চাই না। আমাদের কমিউনিটিতে এনাফ ডিটি মেম্বার না থাকায় আপনারাও কেউ কথা বলার সাহস করছেন না। কিন্তু যে সাহস করে কথা বলছে, আশা করি তাকে আপনারা সাপোর্ট দিবেন।

আপনাদের যদি মনে হয় আমার জাজমেন্ট ঠিক, তাহলে আমাকে আপনার লিস্টে ইনক্লুড করবেন। আর যদি আপনার মনে হয় যে আমার জাজমেন্ট ভালো না বা আমি বায়াসড, তাহলে আমাকে এক্সক্লুড করবেন। আর আপনাদের কমিউনিটি মেম্বার হিসেবে অনুরোধ, আমাকে এক্সক্লুড করার পড়ে অন্তত আমাকে কারণ টা জানাবেন। কোণ যায়গায় আমার ভুল ছিলো, আমি সেটা হয় শুধরে নেবো, নইলে আমার মতামত শেয়ার করবো। চুপ করে থাকার দিন শেষ।

খাইছে এতক্ষনে ১২ কেজি গ্যাস সিলিন্ডার ২৫০০ টাকা। আপনাদের এলাকার খবর কী? যদিও এটা স্থানভেদে দামের পার্থক্য হতে পারে৷ গতকাল সন্ধ্যায় আমাদের এখানে এক দোকানে জিজ্ঞেস করেছিলাম, বলে গ্যাসের সিলিন্ডার নেই, দাম ২৩০০ টাকা চেয়েছিলো। এই হলো বর্তমানে দেশের অবস্থা, কোথাও স্বস্তি নেই।

মনের ভিতরে প্রকাশ করার মতন আরও অনেক কথা রয়েছে কিন্তু সব জায়গায় চলে স্বৈরশাসন, বললে কি চাকরি থাকবে?

তার ওপর আমরা হলাম সাউথ এশিয়ান এবং বাংলাদেশি আমাদেরকে কেউ এমনিতেই দেখতে পারে না, আর এর জন্য কোন কারণ ছাড়াও Distrust করে রাখে. যদিও এখানেও আমাদের ভুল রয়েছে, কারণ আমাদের মধ্যে থেকেই স্ক্যাম থেকে শুরু করে মাল্টি অ্যাকাউন্ট এর অপব্যবহার বিশাল পরিসরে হয়ে থাকে। এইজন্য হয়তোবা আমরা কেউ সাহস পাই না?

I don't think you know how domains and subdomains work. If you knew that, you would never say that the OP's casino is fake or anything like this. If I own the domain Playw3.com, no one can use a subdomain of my main domain unless I give them access. Both websites are owned by the same person/team. They just rebranded the subdomain with a different logo; there are no other changes. I have no idea why they would launch a website on a subdomain unless they plan to do B2B white label business by themself by creating and running casinos under the same main domain by creating multiple subdomains. This will allow them to use the same license on all the casinos.

It's true that there are a good number of pool topics, but I also don't think they deserve a child board. Unless the idea is to stop having mega-topics pools.

The easier solution would be enforcing the following-
1. Sig campaign can't enforce min number of post in specific board/section.

2. No minimum post for getting paid.

...Most campaigns actually require 5 or maybe 10 at most gambling board posts, but I have seen forum members who write 90% of their posts in the Gambling boards, even though their campaign does not require it. Some people just find it easy to complete their daily quota in the gambling board. They could write anything and walk away.

The easier solution would be enforcing the following-

It can be enforced by campaign manager but as long as no rules are there, it wont be.

Some people just find it easy to complete their daily quota in the gambling board. They could write anything and walk away.

The real version.

This guy has literally no limit on the amount of bullshit that can say - even making "partial" quotes.
Yea sure everyone is annoyed to be mentioned, imagine being mentioned 170 times in 2 weeks by the same user.

Whenever my managed contests were criticized by jeremypwr and LoyceV (if I'm not wrong), I slowly paused them. I have been approached by a few users who were interested to assist me running contests but I didn't because I didn't want to be criticized again for them. I have paused them for indefinite time, until I can come with better contest idea.

please @[name removed] can yousupport the flag for a CONFIRMED SCAM THAT WAS ENDORSED BY LITTLE MOUSE !?
Or you have changed idea once you have seen another guys scammed / Little Mouse wants provide "better contest idea"?

It seems the case has escalated faster than light.
I myself participated in the review campaign as well, and I was paid. Even though I gambled that away, others confirmed that they were able to withdraw the funds. So, your missing reward is an exception here, which might have happened by mistake. My best guess is they didn't credit the reward since there was an ongoing issue with your account, which you reported already.

I am not taking his side just because he is a campaign manager. His job is to make sure you get paid for the review. I checked the entire thread, and I can see he said he will pay for the review. However, I also see that he was rude, probably because you kept pushing him and he felt disturbed.

Frogbet might turn into a scam casino, and they may get negative feedback for their actions. But I think your negative feedback on Little Mouse in this case became a personal issue rather than a financial dispute. He insulted you a couple of times, and you did the same by calling him a scammer multiple times, even though he is just a campaign manager.

You two should sit together, have some coffee, and fix this mess. Take a break, come back with fresh mind and I am sure that will help.

Definetely. That's why I have spent around 140 messages exposing a scam and getting harassed in public.

Oh yeah. I saw the previous post as well.
Thanks for pointing it out. One thing I don't understand is why there is no feedback on the other connected accounts? Not even neutral ones. If someone else notices the same connection after a few months and they don't see any feedback on some of these accounts, then they might think it wasn't exposed, and they may post the findings again. So, I would request you to leave at least neutral feedback since you are on the DT network.

This is one of the reasons bitbollo escaped eight years ago after operating the Ponzi scam. If someone had left neutral feedback back then, the scam would have been exposed a long time ago.

As I promised, I am here with my real-life user experience at Rizzy Casino.
The deposit took a long time to appear in my balance, and I believe Rizzy couldn't do anything since there was a mempool congestion and it took an hour to mine the block. I tried the daily spin after the deposit, but I didn't win anything. I tried it again today for the 2nd time, but no luck for me.

I was specifically looking to try the Shark game as it is pretty new to me. However, I realised that it is the worst version of the Mines game. I tried most of my deposited money in this game. I saw they have the Mines game as well, which is better than the Shark game.

My luck was terrible, but the experience wasn't that bad.

The Legendary DT1 top-tier scammer and the forum bully were active yesterday and even posted on the forum, but did not respond to this thread. The more surprising thing is that he has not excluded lovesmayfamilis yet, which might be a good thing, as he has realised that being a bully no longer helps him and makes things worse for him. I am surprised that after all this evidence and this inaccurate negative feedback, some people are still keeping him on their Trust list. I am going to call them out every other day because of this failure.

They choose to ignore everything.
They choose to trust a bully.
They choose to trust a abuser.
They choose to trust a scammer.

I am sure they won't damage their reputation for this amount. Their forum representative provides far better support in this forum. The correct action would be to reach their forum representative at this moment. However, I am kinda disappointed seeing how their live chat treated you. I understand that they are probably annoyed because you asked them again and again, and they don't know what to do next.

If KYC data is collected using a 3rd-party service, the problem could be with the 3rd-party service. Betcoin should make sure the service is up and that the user can submit their documents properly. For now, you should try again a different device and different internet connection while you wait for a response from their forum representative.

Lastly, I do not believe it’s a device issue. I will include this detail in my original post. I used three different devices: my iPad, my iPhone, and my Android. The iPad and iPhone ran the smoothest and fastest, especially my iPad, yet the glitch persisted.

I will post about my playing experience soon.

Accounts Connected: (Note: Banned shown in red / Inactive in Blue/Active)

1. coaltin
2. Cryptomultiplier
3. Lorence.xD Inactive
--snip--
Miscellaneous account coaltin already has three negative feedback.

Accounts Connected: (Note: Banned shown in red / Inactive in Blue/Active)

1. coaltin
2. Cryptomultiplier
3. Lorence.xD Inactive

Accounts Connected: (Note: Banned shown in red / Inactive in Blue/Active)

1. coaltin
2. Cryptomultiplier
3. Lorence.xD Inactive

ক্রিপ্টো নিরাপত্তা জনিত কারণে ৩য় কোয়ার্টারেই ক্ষতির পরিমাণ ১.২৬ বিলিয়ন ডলারে পৌঁছেছে, যা Q2 এর তুলনায় ৫৩.৯% বেশি। যার মধ্যে বিটগেট থেকেই ৩১% লোকসান হয়েছে। যদিও আগে যখন এই ঘটনা শেয়ার করেছিলাম তখনে ৩৫০ মিলিয়ন ক্ষতির পরিমান উল্লেখ করেছিলাম কিন্তু বিটগেটের মোট ক্ষতি ৩৮৭.৫ মিলিয়ন ডলার।

খাইছে এতক্ষনে ১২ কেজি গ্যাস সিলিন্ডার ২৫০০ টাকা। আপনাদের এলাকার খবর কী? যদিও এটা স্থানভেদে দামের পার্থক্য হতে পারে৷ গতকাল সন্ধ্যায় আমাদের এখানে এক দোকানে জিজ্ঞেস করেছিলাম, বলে গ্যাসের সিলিন্ডার নেই, দাম ২৩০০ টাকা চেয়েছিলো। এই হলো বর্তমানে দেশের অবস্থা, কোথাও স্বস্তি নেই।

ডিটি নেটওয়ার্কে পারটিসিপেট করার মতো কোন ইচ্ছাই আমার ছিলো না। যেহেতু ফোরামে ডিটি নেটওয়ার্ক কিছুটা বায়াসড বলে আমি মনে করি, আমি আমার সিদ্ধান্ত পরিবর্তন করেছি এবং আমি আমার নিজের ট্রাস্ট লিস্ট বিল্ড করেছি। আমি আপনাদের সবাইকে অনুরোধ করবো যে আপনারাও আপনাদের নিজেদের ট্রাস্ট লিস্ট বিল্ড করুন। আপনি ডিটি নেটওয়ার্কে যাওয়ার আগ অব্দি আপনার কথার কোন ভ্যালু কেউ দিবে না, যেমন আমার কথার ভ্যালু কেউ দিচ্ছে না এই মুহূর্তে। আমি কখনো অন্যায়ের বিরুদ্ধে বা ইনজাস্টিস এর বিরুদ্ধে চুপ থাকতে চাই না। আমাদের কমিউনিটিতে এনাফ ডিটি মেম্বার না থাকায় আপনারাও কেউ কথা বলার সাহস করছেন না। কিন্তু যে সাহস করে কথা বলছে, আশা করি তাকে আপনারা সাপোর্ট দিবেন।

The long-awaited sportsbook is live in Earnbet. Feel free to check out and share your feedback.
We got a new signature design. Please wear the new sig ASAP.

---

---

I checked this account and picked some random posts from it. I have checked 4 or 5 posts with QuillBot, Copyleaks, and ZeroGPT. But I was not able to find anything significant to come to a conclusion. Most posts came back with 0% AI. So, I am not sure if I should have checked with different tools, or if he is probably a genuine writer. I would wait for others to check and share their findings. Considering people use humanizer AI these days, it is very much possible some users are tricking AI detector tools by using different AI.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5579146.msg67205157#msg67205157

zerogpt.com - 0% AI
quillbot - 0% AI
gptzero - 100% AI
sapling - 0.1% AI score

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5595691.msg67205102#msg67205102

zerogpt.com - 13.3% AI
quillbot - 0% AI
gptzero - 1% AI, 99% Mixed
sapling - 0% Ai score

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5404767.msg67205074#msg67205074

zerogpt.com - 0.9% AI
quillbot - 0% AI
gptzero - 94% AI, 6% mixed
sapling - 0.6% AI score

You keep repeating that even though you haven't excluded him yourself?

Not only that, but you've been registered since 2017 and your trust list is empty. With a fairly normal trust list, you'd be in DT2, and your red tag on Bitbollo would put more pressure on him to remove the unfair tag he's left on your profile. Both would be inappropriate tags, but at least you'd be tied.

That said, I'm going to ~him, but the unfair tag on your profile is just one of the reasons.

Definetely.

I have left 10 pages of explanations in two topics and these actions are typical of shill of scammers.

Can we clarify after many days we can open a scam accusations without being public treated like a shit?
Can we clarify (so all users of forum can use this deouble standard next time) why this users has been allowed to deny there was a scam despite there was 3 pages of topic talking about the scam?

After 20/25 messages and a full topic explaining a scam ongoing since a week https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594694.0
I have been treated like a shit by this user despite was everything true. He has never replied to my observation but has just try to retiliate calling me "liar".
Also the trust the he left has no sense.
Have you see lies here? No, thats just another confirmations he is not a trustworthy user.

At this point, lets be clear here: some users have an indefinite list of scams behaviour condoned. Meanwhile reputable users have no chance to highlight scammers and scam behaviours.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5594724.msg67177548#msg67177548 These are facts and evidences.

Opinions are based on? Yes he is so productive that has spent an entire topic to harrass me, and still you cannot comment about "the bet of 5K USD"...
He lose the bets. He was lying even on this.  I find something pretty questionable this approach to not look on EVIDENCES.

Anyone that has continued to advertise and promote a casino despite it's a confirmed scam deserve just a red trust.

I would not be in your head if you think this.


Why only this topic?
Have you seen that after I have posted a series of scams that are still ongoing now it's 2 weeks / 5 topics / 146 mentions to harass my person?
Anyone can check reference for these negative trusts, or verify why they have this urgency to open all this topics WITHOUT A SINGLE TXID linked to a scam.

@Shishir99 if you would know how it works blockchain you will never try to fabricate such delirant accusation about keys that are in my possession since 13 years and never linked to any scam and used with CEX KYC.

I see that you think that the negative feedback on my profile is not correct. I appreciate it. But he is the forum bully, who doesn't care about others' suggestions. nutildah suggested the same, and this bully excluded nutildah because of that. I am afraid he won't listen to you. So, if you do not agree with his feedback, it's time for you to act ~bitbollo

I think many people will agree that the negative tag should be removed from Shishir99; after that, everyone will disperse, keeping to themselves their opinions about both your story and the story of Shishir99. Many people here still have doubts, despite the long quotes, and you're acting like a stubborn child, pointing fingers at others and completely forgetting how people see you and what exactly they notice...

There are really a lot of topics worth discussing on the forum, but this topic has already outlived its usefulness.

No I am not this account " oneadvocate " but thanks for having the doubt I have a full time life dedicate about these crappy non-sense accusations.

edit: in the last 2 weeks @OP has quoted or mentioned my username 144 times .

Yes, but he never continued the review, and the second user simply submitted the application again, deleting the previous one. I think this is the most common mistake when changing accounts. And, of course, old-timers here know perfectly well that archives get checked. That is precisely why there was such a ready-made excuse. The question is, aren't there too many coincidences? For example, Shishir99 and I rarely cross paths, even if one of us copies someone's address (say, my address is on page 3, and you publish it on page 10)🤷‍♀️. But these two communicate. Although there was only an address in the first application, was it necessary to copy it from him in this case?. Although sure, sure, it's just a coincidence. We believe, we believe.🤗🤗🤫


edit: You need to be a sniper to land on the right page by chance and copy the exact  address  you need.🤯

2. One old address is not control of another account. The load-bearing link is 14A8fkAAv2yaLJUBU5Nb82QWTtpPSYFPp2. Cs87kxy posted it on 19 June 2015 in a signature-campaign signup. Bitbollo posted the same string on 12 August 2015 next to 1BoSH7RisUAPpGfNbX8scSB43YP6Tx3g7M and 1JwLxS3za2s9gFVzn4SKk6xpgg24bxxh9d. In 2015 addresses were pasted into contests, quoted, and reused in giveaways. Posting a string someone else already posted does not show who held the key in 2016 or 2017, when the other account picked up its negative trust.

3. Exchange hot wallets are shared. Later posts point at both sides sending toward a cex.io hot wallet. A hot wallet receives deposits from thousands of customers. Shared traffic into an exchange wallet is not proof the keys are controlled by one person. Deposit addresses and hot wallets get mixed traffic all the time.

I think many people will agree that the negative tag should be removed from Shishir99; after that, everyone will disperse, keeping to themselves their opinions about both your story and the story of Shishir99. Many people here still have doubts, despite the long quotes, and you're acting like a stubborn child, pointing fingers at others and completely forgetting how people see you and what exactly they notice...

There are really a lot of topics worth discussing on the forum, but this topic has already outlived its usefulness.

How many days/weeks/months/years would you continue?

...
bitbollo never said a word about it.
...

Even though there is a gap between your and his application dates, I would give it the benefit of the doubt since the application was in the same thread. I appreciate you posting the conversation here, but I don't think anyone would consider it. I just noticed that he also applied in the same thread before your application, so I assume the mistake probably happened. You have been around for a while already. I would recommend avoiding copy-pasting during the application. This might cause problems in the future. I have removed the neutral feedback. I apologise for the stress you may have had.

Let's make it an official forum rule so everyone will know when will they get their jail-free card.

You can trust him for the last few years of good behaviour if that's what you choose.

He's a bully this forum's DT network has covered for, year after year, while the rest of us were expected to look away.

What's the TL;DR here? Do OP's findings prove a connection sufficiently?

Accounts Connected: (Note: Banned shown in red / Inactive in Blue/Active)

1. adultcrypto
2. Cossyblack

Proof


https://bitlist.co/post/66511915/versions


Related address:

Miscellaneous Both accounts have active loans from shasan.