Bitcoin Forum

I guess I stepped on someone's toes enough to warrant some old-fashioned trust spamming! Someone actually went through the effort to create several accounts only to give some negative feedback to me.

I'm flattered, impressed and disappointed at the same time.

This is obvious spamming. Hopefully theymos or another admin will remove it.

Those who have "mind" knows they are from sockpuppets.

BTW, can you tell us who is this "someone"? I think it is most probably a MSDN key seller.

I cannot conclusively say who is behind it. Quite likely it's one of the Microsoft key sellers, but it doesn't really matter. It's all newbie accounts and under the untrusted feedback anyway. I'm just surprised that they would actually go through this length to achieve.... what? Nothing if you ask me.

I think that is untrusted feedback, it's all over Vod's profile too.
Vod deserved it, and you too kind of deserve some negative trust (for starting the flame regarding MSDN sales)  ::) But this is not the way how this should happen.
This is totally wrong. Admins would surely remove it :)

Oh gosh lol. I don't think anyone is going to take that feedback seriously.

I do like the ones where it says to check the reference for more details but then there is no reference.

It is spam but I am not sure it will get removed   

should admins disable leaving trust from newbies to avoid this kind of case?

IMO a ban of trust spammers (alt-accounts from someone here, for sure) could be more useful.

Another important issue is that someone's found an effective way to register and control multiple accounts. That's not a good thing.

There's a lot of bans that may be useful, but the forum doesn't have the man power or time to keep up with it all. It also doesn't change the fact they can just create new accounts and do the same thing.

It will not stop this problem, they will wait until all the account turn in jr. member and they start again to spam your trust page. It seems there is not a valid solution, and the troll/spammer will return always here in the forum.

13 fake accounts created for me!   :D

I'm going through them all and flagging them as fake accounts, since they are using existing usernames and just adding a "-1" to it.

Yea even though the usernames are not the same it is clearly scamming. What did you do that make him mad though? I doubt that he would be doing this just for fun or a personal grudge. Is there and evidence of scamming?

Wow, you must of really pissed him off. 30 false negative feedbacks :-\. Behavior like this makes me reconsider of trading on the forums.

The effort that he put into making all these 30 accounts and leaving trust on each single account. Thats just childish. Do we have any facts on what potential scammed happen yet? Or is it just complete random trust attack.

Nothing of solid evidence yet, all that I know is that the MSDN seller could be the root of all these accounts. I wouldn't call it a random trust attack as it only happen after the debate between Vod and FuckIdolPlus.

Really? You decide to negative trust spam all users selling anything you think is bad. I have been selling MSDN keys since december and have no unresolved complaints. I have been selling products on this forum for a long time and never had a problem (longer than your account existed). I can assure you the negative trust I left you is because you have no reason to leave me negative trust for something so ridiculous. I never dealt with you and I advertise my products exactly how they are. I dont say they are not MSDN keys when they are. GO through the digital goods section and I bet you 80% of the stuff would not meet your approval does not mean they are not allowed on this forum.

Does it really matter? Everyone in this thread including the OP is just making mountains out of molehills. If whoever sends you trust is not in the default trust list then it doesn't make a single iota of difference because nobody will pay any attention to it at all. Gavin Andresen has negative trust. Theymos has negative trust. Even SATOSHI has negative trust.

some other people will never know that those trust is not true at all and some will see that and will believe those

I agree with this statement which is what pisses me off. I take care of my customers and always provide great support on any product I sell to avoid negative trust. I sell things as a side thing but its not my main reason for being on this board unlike most other MSDN key sellers. So its not like when I stop selling these keys I will disappear. I will still be active on btctalk and that trust will stay. If I somehow scammed OP or broke the rules of btctalk then the negative trust would be appropriate but for what I did its ridiculous and undeserved. I dont false advertise the keys at all.

I got into it a little bit with Vod yesterday because I also don't understand how/why MSCORP intellectual property has anything to do with the bitcoinforum or why he's going around neg-repping anyone who deals with this stuff.  Why are people on default trust acting as MSCORP representatives I can't understand.

FuckIdolPlus, are you starting shit related to MSCORP?  Why?

(I'm not saying you deserve the trust spam, just asking why/if this is the case.)

I was told earlier by a member that creating multiple accounts is allowed and giving negative or positive feedback also via those accounts is allowed. Trust isn't moderated and so I don't think it can be removed and most members don't take it seriously if it appears spammy but you have got negative feedback by so many users for different reasons and some look valid "Never dealed with this person , Giving bad feedbacks , he should mind his own bussiness." "I Never deal with you, why do you leave "Negative feedback" for me?"

He has a financial interest in Microsoft/Microsoft products. People selling Microsoft products at a discount will make it so the time he invested in becoming a Microsoft certified engineer potentially worth less

Yah, we discussused that in the other thread.  I've removed Vod's ratings from my trust network because of this.  I'm not interested in what the microsoft police consider good or bad.  Too bad he's on default trust so microsoft is essentially moderating bitcoin deals :(

You are right "personal compliant" should not be involved in this forum because everyone can give a negative trust to another users (that work for another "society") and this is not really "fair".

An honest thief.  Good for you.

This thread was made before you left me any feedback. It is about the trust spam (new accounts created solely to put some negative feedback on me). I found that noteworthy. I am not asking anyone to remove them. While I disagree with the feedback you left on me it is not trust spam. I disagree with the logic in you feedback. First of all, I'm not leaving negative feedback for all sellers selling anything I think is bad. I left feedback on sellers of Starbucks gift cards because there is credit card fraud involved. I left feedback on sellers of Microsoft product keys because there is fraud involved as well. That you have no unresolved customer complaints is all fine and dandy, but that doesn't make what you're doing legit.

If there is something factually wrong about the feedback I gave you then please let me know and I will amend it.

Most of the spammy ones were left at the same day but we don't know if it happened at the exact same time. So it's not 100% sure that someone was using multiple accounts simultaneously.

If all were in the same day then it could just be a bunch of unhappy customers all finding out about some scam or something all at once but it doesn't really look the case. Logging in and logging out of all these accounts takes a while so I wouldn't be surprised if these were all done in 2 or 3 hours at once. I haven't had time to check all the accounts but are they all mostly newbies or actual established accounts with variation (not all the same register date etc.)

I'm up to 35 spam trust ratings now, all from newbie accounts with no activity.

I must be very important to someone out there!

maybe newbie accounts shouldn't be allowed to give trust ratings in the same way they can't vote on polls

I disagree. Newbies do business, in fact a large percentage of gift card market is newbies, because non-bitcoiners find this great deal and sign up for an account here. Disallowing newbies wouldn't fix anything with trust spam since the vast majority of trust left here is by people higher than junior member.

That's because a large percentage of the gift cards are purchased with stolen credit cards.  People burn through newbie accounts because they are easy to create.

Agreed. I really don't think there are too many people that make deals as soon as they join bitcointalk for the first time. Almost all newbies making deals are old members hiding behind alt accounts.

Besides if a newbie makes deals at least for a little while they will be junior in a couple of weeks. So allowing only Jr. members and above to leave feedback would make sense to me.

It takes 30 activity points to get a newbie account turn into a Jr. Member...

That does seem like it might fix the issue associated with this particular thread.  If you have to wait a month to use your brand new 20 accounts drop trust spam, presumably your head would have cooled off in those 4 weeks and you'd have thought of something more useful to do.

I removed negative trust off two accounts that stopped selling MSDN keys.  The trust spam seems to have stopped for me.   :-\

Which is 3 14 day periods, a month and a half. If the user really wants to get into the bitcoin world I am sure they will wait about 42 days until they can be part of the trust member.

Of course they will.  The point here was that someone or some ones were creating a bunch of accounts just to drop a bunch of negative trust, ie trust spam.  Presuambly if you have to wait a month and a half, you'll have calmed down a bit in that time and so creating a bunch of accounts just to trust spam won't really happen.

Orrrr, you give scammers 42 days of immunity before the newbie they just got scammed or almost scammed can speak out against them. Can anyone show a single example of where trust spam by newbies has caused any effect on anyone in the slightest? Maybe point out a thread where someone refused to deal with someone because they had 50 negatives from untrusted newbies?

This is also a good point.  But doesn't this cut both ways, if everyone ignores trust from newbies then how is removing their ability to put that equivalent to removing their voice to "speak out".  Presumably they can still post issues in "scam accusations".  But if 50 accounts try to post the same scam accusation just to rage-spam the forum, the mods will presumably delete those threads.

I admit, I'm not passionate about this either way, and I haven't had any trust-spam issues.  I just thought that the waiting period on feedback may have made sense.  But I may be wrong...

The point is, that newbie's feedback (and everyone's for that matter) is pretty much disregarded unless you include a reference link, and an accurate description of what the negative is for. I haven't seen a single case since the trust system was implemented where trust spam has been any sort of issue. I've seen people annoyed that they recieved a negative, but I haven't seen a single case where a false negative from trust spammers has inhibited anyone in any way. I dont see why we need to propose fixes for something that isn't a problem. If it becomes a problem, we should fix it.

I understand.  My only reply would be that annoyances are, in a sense, problems.  Minor ones by definition, yes.  But many annoyances can certainly become problematic.  In any case, I won't say anything more on this because I've never been trust spammed and therefore never even been annoyed by it. 

 I just left a review noting symantec (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=382389) hacks websites to steal keys and resell them (after he publicly admitted so) and I instantly got trust spam from several accounts, very similarly as OP. So I'm pretty sure he's the one who left that spam for OP too.

Edit: After leaving a review on his shill accounts noting they belong to symantec he removed almost all of the spam from my profile.

haha wow that is a lot of negative feedback. Well I guess we now know who was behind all those spam negatives that Vod got not long ago. None of them have any credibility though, especially considering that they all have negative trust

To try to clear things up. That's what people are supposed to do in a scam accusation. Unfortunately you weren't helpful so I had to give up.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012548.msg10990891#msg10990891

I recently (April 4) received many negative ratings from new accounts - that guy copied my own comments --> 0/10 for effort.

I didn't give a bad rating to symantec, but maybe he maintains more than one bitcointalk account

Yes I'm pretty sure he has at least 2 additional accounts he uses to sell keys (not 100% sure so I won't mention the accounts) and who knows if others besides those.

They are simple rules for leaving feedback. There are many more rules for leaving trust feedback. Don't claim things only with those three lines. :)


I don't want you to stop posting in this thread, I want you to stop using unnecessary BBCodes and speak calmly.


This shows how exactly is your personality.


I (we) aren't in for a war. It looks like you are in for a war. You even can't talk correctly.


I didn't understand this. However, I am fairly sure you have misunderstood.


Warning is good but you should clarify all things or atleast the questions asked by members. What you did were reposting same post(s).



Negative trust feedback wasn't for scamming, it was for bad attitude and possible-false scam accusation.


You did see his profile, right? We aren't ignoring him, you couldn't even make a truthful scam accusation and came up with bad behavior.


Yes, self-moderated threads are bad for sales but there can be good intentions too(not saying FuckIdolPlus has/had good/bad intention).

P.S. You can clearly understand what does the forum warning mean. IMHO you have a few misunderstandings but you aren't ready to ask them. :)

What is with my messages? I was trying to ask FuckIdolPlus to know more about this. If you look my posts, you can clearly see that I have done the same thing earlier.


I asked her to give the password to me or a trusted person so that I or anyone else can verify what she is claiming is true or not.


See the reference.


If you have checked the time, you can easily know I was sleeping at that time. I checked your thread now and if you unlock it, I can reply. Thank you!


A fair warning: You maybe going for similar names. I can assure you, I don't know here but I know you won't believe it. If you think it is her's, it's okay but probably, it may belong to someone else and you might be breaking their privacy. Anyway, it's always your choice.


Yes, I am an Indian. I still don't know why should I protect a person(if he/she is bad) even if the person is living in my country.

This is going a little offtopic. If you think my actions are bad or irrelevant, feel free to start a scam accusation and we can discuss it there.

Thanks mate. Whose next or am I the last? :)

https://i.imgur.com/N1IzfHz.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/N1IzfHz.jpg)

Who cares? Negative trusts from brand new/newbie users. I hope no one will trust  their judgments  ::). will the trust system be (in the new forum software) the same as now?

95 accounts for trust bombing? Really?

this is obvious spam. I think this probably qualifies to have them removed, however either way it is not going to affect you.

IMO anyone that attacks someone based on their race is deducted credibility points in my book and are generally not going to be listened to.

Usually racially charged comments follow from a person that has not legitimate ground to stand on in their accusations. Muhammed Zakir was one of the first people I remembered seeing on here regularly, and although I don't know him well seems like a genuinely nice guy. There are certainly bad actors amongst all races and peoples, so trying to justify this simply because he is an Indian is rather laughable.

:o Why don't we ban as he/she is clearly spamming. I mean there is ban for post_spam and PM_spam, so why not a ban for "trust_spam"? This will increase if no action is taken and of course, never want a trust moderation. The trust feedback can stay there.

+1. Symantec (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=382389) seems to have the habit to resort to retaliation trust feedback abuse; recently, at the beginning of the MSDN Key trade affair he sent me a PM saying he left me -ve trust feedback - over the following neutral feedback: Selling Keys from MSDN is not allowed as per Microsoft own TOS (see http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-windows_install/selling-product-key-from-msdntechnet-and-or/cf40c328-67ce-49b6-bbb6-c28cda92c06e) and may also be a misdemeanor or felony in your jurisdiction accordingly to IP protection law and/or other laws. This can apply also to Keys from other software houses. Always do your own due diligence before engaging in a trade! - then backtracking. After this I reminded him - PMs #msg3525723, #msg3526241, #msg3526263 - about how trust feedback was supposed to operate; so now, I think he has no excuse for his abusive behaviour.

This seems like a reasonable approach, I think.  Salty?

If I were him, I will stop this. Won't it be boring to login to 95 accounts and leave feedback to different accounts? -x_x-


It was discussed earlier but there wasn't much use. As it isn't illegal because at most, it is punishable under Civil law.


What Vod did was to get this to attention but it went in a different way as there was "illegal" and "stolen". One the contrary, Vod has a soft corner for Microsoft and that is one of the reason for leaving negative feedback and also one of the reason for anti-vod statements.


For me, he has: "I am an Indian". :-\

Edit: He has came up with FB profiles which claims she is living in my state. Pretty soon, he will tell she is my neighbour. Hope he atleast won't tell "she is living in my home/house". ::)

I don't care what your purpose is, it's still spam, and it accomplishes nothing. Use your time away from the forum to chill out.

Such poppycock. If you don't want Vod or anyone else to leave you negative trust then either 1) Don't sell stolen goods and products which also violate the company's TOU, or 2) Do business on another forum that doesn't rate members or provide such protections.

Just last week in another thread, a user by the name of SellMaster3000 or something was doing the same thing, and seemed shocked that people would leave him negative feedback. Vod is simply making a note of facts which is valuable if you want to make an informed decision. If you like cutting corners you will overlook the trust comments and contine buying from such vendors I am sure. If integrity matters to you, then you will look elsewhere.

This. It clearly states you have created lots of account just for trust spam.


This is were you are wrong. If I am abusing trust system, you shouldn't do the same to me, you should post in Meta and we can discuss.


Another misunderstanding of yours. I am not a magnet. You can't:

• Clearly post a scam accusation.
• Avoid trust spam.
• Avoid abusive language.
• Clear your doubts.


As you call us Dogs, we are same. Interesting theory.


These are explained above. Have you took the time to read before copy-pasting? Besides, could you teach me how to "suck" these if that solve your problem? Whenever I tried, my mouth is either vaccum or is filled with air. Thank you!

LOL


Sadly, this wasn't the case in every jurisdiction. As an example, in Italy to IP protection laws qualify users of such Keys as felons due to them being punishable even when you do it not-for-profit, in order to make a "profit" which can also be seen in the simple expense savings due to the fact that you have had paid less money than for the purchase of the original key/software. Since Symantec self-admitted to being using an exploit to illegally obtaining MS Keys an Italian user could also held accountable to article 648 -a felony - of the Italian penal code (if the same user was unaware of the illicit origin of the Keys and simply failed to verify their lecit origin - doubtful - he could hope the be held accountable to article 712 - a misdemeanor - of the same penal code. Civil law punishments can always be applied even if court charges are brought.
However, if I remove a software from a system and resell the same key to another usere this would be OK both to IP, penal laws & to MS (or other software house). Obviously, multi-user key licenses have to be sold in bulk and cannot be sold individually.


As I said above out there are many court jurisdictions. Vod called out MS since he was knowledgeable over it; but sw came from many software house and I am concerned of having to fight in a court not about a developer balance sheet.

He (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=382389) came back with an alt-account kinglong (uid:490032) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=490032) to evade ban opening an almost identical thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1016057.0) to repeat same accusation against MZ after users asked him to provide verifiable evidence (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1012548.0;all) over the FuckIdolPlus scam case he was involved in. Also he still engaged in giving out fake trust feedbacks.

http://gyazo.com/f820c68abd0a5764a0b6ce5a575a3cc9 (http://gyazo.com/f820c68abd0a5764a0b6ce5a575a3cc9)