About fohguild.org and Requiem

Are you familiar with these terms: Slander, Liable. If not I suggest you read up on them before speaking up again.

It's already a known fact that Tyen isn't "playing" dumb, also that he doesn't have access to "change the site" except for visual changes, and now I believe he can't even do that. He doesn't have physical access to the servers, and has never been able to "make coding changes to the database". Req has already stated all of this.

You're accusing him of hacking, infecting FoH users with virii, using the "bot-net" to raise FoH traffic, and being smart enough to do any of these things... and all to win a pointless argument on the internet... rly?

I think you give him too much credit, he'd get arrested within the first hour if he tried shit like that. The "bots" that dumbdick uses to get "likes/followers" run on his own computer. He's certainly not making a living off of it! LOL!

Pretty sure that Req doesn't let anyone access the servers and guarantee he would never allow someone to use his servers in any illegal way, such as infecting/hacking people's computers. Those are the kinds of things that make the Feds show up and take all your toys.

Click to expand...

You sure don't seem to have a firm grasp of logic or the real world.

Req DID allow someone to use his servers in an illegal way, by not fixing the problem from the first time he was alerted to it, he allowed the site to be a distributor of malware temporarily. Is that a punishable crime? No, it's not.

Req has specifically said Tyen has helped him make coding changes specific to this site and their customized version of vbulletin. Picard/Worf, facebook like/share buttons.. these were Tyen coding changes to the board.

I don't think Tyen is good enough to author a trojan of that kind, but those things are freely available if you visit blackhat forums, which is how Tyen finds the automation tools for his facebook/twitter scams.

The legality of a bot network that is used to artificially boost traffic is exactly the same as what he does in his automation of boosting social media presence. They are illegal by the letter of the law and the terms of service of some companies, but it's almost impossible to enforce, and no one cares because no money is being stolen and nothing is getting damaged in the process. This isn't like hacking a bank and wiring money to the caymans, or a virus that brings down a corporation's network (like anonymous and sony), ffs. The FBI cyber crimes division would laugh at you for bringing anything like this to their attention and trying to press charges.

The majority of people with malware like that on their computer wouldn't ever notice, and the ones that did would only notice due to an anti-virus catching it. It's designed to NOT destroy your computer so that it can continue to use your connection as a proxy when needed. It doesn't run off the foh server or something, it searches for the people with the trojan and remotely uses their connection to access websites and such.

I also never said it was ALL just to win an argument. But, once he has access to it, I could see him pumping up the traffic of whatever was being lost just for that reason. Considering he continuously spouts the 'unique visitors' and 'traffic is just as high as always' while morenetz was up when it was clear to anyone that posts have been WAY down, like 1/10th what they were a month ago. It's like he only wants to focus on some artificial number cause he's manipulating it. It's like he's using foh to practice, so he can run tests to see how much of the bots are actually effecting traffic before he directs it at a legit business in the hopes of monetizing it.

This is a private forum, with no ads or fees. No one has any legal recourse even if Req and Tyen literally came out and said 'oh yea, we knew it was distributing legit malware, so what?'.

For the record, even if Tyen did everything I said (and I doubt that, but I think I'm in the ballpark), I highly doubt he made it obvious to Req so that Req could always have plausible deniability if something somehow did come of it. Can always just say 'someone' corrupted the site and he fixed it, case closed.

Who are you anyway, Open Source Solution's CEO? lol. You give off this aura of faux authority, when you don't have a god damn clue what you're talking about, which is pretty much every 'business guy' of a small tech company that I've ever known.

Click to expand...