@Revoltman09 Multiple fraudulent addresses associated with you and the 1623 proposal were transferred to the same account .This is not conclusive evidence, as it could also be the address of the exchange, but it is certain that you are associated with several other fraudulent addressses
Hi @Revoltman09 ,I have a question about your Prop 1647. You said that your proposal did not pass last month because of the Alleychatt68 bad faith vote, so you are now re-initiating it.
@PinkCowTokyo These three people have proposals for almost every round, and I have questioned them publicly before, and they have given answers, and I have found no evidence to prove that they have problems
@PinkCowTokyo@Cryptofairy5 I do have a list here, but it is difficult to verify due to the inability of social accounts. The chain address is easy to create a new one. It is very difficult to get whether the user is reliable from my list alone.
@branditmanaged@PeeCowYay Many people join CULTMANDER just to get a little more yield, which has nothing to do with whether he votes or not per se. If we could reward active users according to whether they actually vote or not, maybe we could attract real participants