Bitcoin Forum

...Buy a bitcointalk account!
Or sell one. Judging by the "Auctions" & "Digital Goods" subs, it's the hottest thing for 2015.
And most of the credit, I must add, rightfully belongs to the forum staff. Thanks, guys, for making this place what it is today. Satoshi would be proud.

http://s10.postimg.org/relg2xyhl/Capture.png

Another thread whining about forum policies, rly? You bet. Salty locked my last one, bitch to him.

Oh my God, another thread http://techforum.it/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/asd.gif... amazing! Now, what is the purpose of this (new) thread? I think SaltySpitoon had some valid reason when he locked your previous thread.

Bitcointalk is the only forum which I have seen that allows one to create alt accounts and even sell them (though it's discouraged). How does this forum benefit by letting this happen as it would be one person who will be creating and replying to the same topics most of the time and earn activity. I have seen people who create topics and answer their query themself and it's like they are suffering from split personality. I won't be surprised if the 493071 members may turn out to be just 100-150 members in total and most will be spamming the forum without wearing a Signature. These members don't even bother to get their positive trust removed before selling their account as it earns them more BTC.  >:( Easy to invite scammers to buy their trustworthy accounts.

Don't blame the forum.  Blame the people buying old accounts and paying spammers to participate in signature campaigns.  They're the ones funding this nonsense.

Do you have a solutions to this? Don't blame the staff when you yourself cannot advice the staff to how to stop this activity. And its not the staff who is responsible for it, its the signature campaigns who are responsible for it.

Hello, friend! Happy to explain:

I've started this thread because, though the last one was deftly locked, the problem it tried to address didn't disappear right along with it.
Baffling, I know.
And yet it's true.


The forum approves of this happening. Banning the sale of forum accounts right on this forum wouldn't be that hard, would it?


You bet.
Prohibit buying and selling of bitcointalk accounts on bitcointalk. Let them work for it - push them to some Sheep TOR market - would cut into the profit margins a bit, no?

This wouldn't need to be constantly restated if threads weren't locked.
ty

Why shouldn't I blame the forum? The forum rules have flaws and I am a member here. If I have an issue, I can't speak about it? The forum is letting people to create more than one account and hence inviting spammers to spam and scammers to scam. When the latter happens, the only thing is said "Scams aren't moderated."

If the rule of creating more than one account and selling accounts is stopped, then that will be a positive change else everyone should just bear the flaws as of now.

I think OgNasty expressed a valid point, also if the forum staff will put a rule don't you think a lot of users will 'bypass' it? This is the unique reason why buying & selling (or have more than one) forum account is not forbidden... because it is impossible to stop this practice.

Yeah, some would. Some rob houses even though there are laws against it. But not as many as would if there were no such laws.

Reality of this isn't binary - shit either happens or it does not. It's a gradient - shades of gray between "shit happens all the time & is pandemic" and "shit never happens." In this case, we want shit to happen less, and I know how to do that.
:)

You can answer my one question? What benefit does the forum get from multiple accounts (especially those accounts created using one IP address)? Any good reason why is it allowed?

Also regarding members going against the rule. Laws are as well broken. That means there shouldn't be any law? Saying that as well does not make sense. Rules can atleast TRY to stop it.

Yes of course, but if there will be a rule here in the forum the 'forum staff' should work x2-x3 try (en)force them to all the forum users. I have read some mod. that it will be really annoying and stressful for them.




Then if you think you are in the right side, send a PM to theymos & open a thread here in the meta section (something of more articulated, not like TerminatorXL did with this thread).

I had opened a thread and got replies which went way off topic. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=977435.0

I thought that this Meta section is for discussing the forum rules rather than sending Theymos a PM which might not be entertained as I am not a reputed member here.

1. Banning the sale of accounts is no different than banning the sale of crack, guns or CP in the same subs. Those are already verboten in those subs, and the mods aren't dropping from exhaustion.

2. The amount of spam and scam generated by bought accounts substantially increases the number of posts on this forum - people are PAID to post. Disallowing account sales would reduce that, and thus the workload for janitors.

3. The forum is not short on funds, as I'm sure you know. Hiring more janitors wouldn't even register on the books.


Doin' the best I can :-\

Selling of accounts would just move to places outside this forum. How would you want the mods to crack down in that case?

As I've mentioned above, I'd be happy if account dealing was done outside of the forum. This would make trading in bitcointalk accounts less frictionless, require more wits than simply making posts in the Digital Goods/Auctions subs, and thus less profitable.
Less profitable = less financial incentive. Take away financial incentive, and, as my rudimentary knowledge of economics suggests, will happen less.

Would also make it far less embarrassing to participate in this forum, because commentary like this just wouldn't happen:

http://s17.postimg.org/mph3uida7/Capture.png

Do I really need to explain why selling aged forum accounts is a bad thing, when new accounts are free to make?

Edit: You post:

Do you see how this "loan" would have had a much better chance of being secured, had the n00b bought himself a nice, reputable account with green trust?

Why do you want it to happen on the forum? Any specific reason why should Account Selling be allowed here? To me there's just one reason that people Earn Bitcoins by doing so and hence they want it to happen. Nobody cares if people spam the forum by owning many accounts and scam members.

If people move outside the forum and find any other means, they will be banned as this would be against the rules. I don't see any benefit to the bitcoin community or the forum by letting this happen.

It wouldn't be hard to say the sale of forum accounts are now banned, but it wouldn't do anything. It would just push their sale off site.


I don't get the relevance. Some wannabe hack journalist gets banned for spamming and then invents a conspiracy? It doesn't matter what we do people will always whine and invent conspiracies to suit their agendas. It also always seems that other people know best on how to run this forum. I suggest those users band together and create their own one if they think they can run one better.

 
At this comment and after, the topic was ended and everyone, myself included started going off topic.

Can you not look around at the world and see the harm that some laws do? Ok we ban account selling, it can't be enforced, and then it becomes more dangerous because people think it can't happen. Its really a simple concept that can be seen all around the world, although governments and police forces have more stopping power for any laws they inact.

You either aren't going to get it, or you do get it and you think it's funny to keep beating a dead horse. For the sake of maybe help I ng you understand, how would you propose we stop account selling? Keeping in mind that we have no way of checking account ownership, no way of breaking encrypted communications, and no way to enforce a penalty? Sure we could ban anyone stupid enough to post in open that they are selling accounts, but then they would make another and sell via a different method. Figure out an idea that isn't "just ban it, people will listen" because that's not how things work.

^^^^
>the harm that some laws do
Sure. Just like some foods can be rotten. Extrapolating from this that *all* food is rotten & thus we should stop eating is nonsense.
This forum has some, albeit vague, unformalized and selectively enforced, laws rules. Are you arguing that these should be tossed, because of the "harm that some laws do"?

>but then they would make another and sell via a different method.

Let's not keep treading over the same ground. I've outlined what should be done:
 1. prohibit bitcointalk account sales in general
 2. enforce the policy in the market section, like you enforce "no drugs/guns/CP"
 3. if sufficient evidence exists* of account no longer being used by original owner, ban it.
 4. if sufficient evidence exists* of a user selling accounts, ban it.
 5. Tell n00bs that accounts may be bought and sold off-forum.
     Tell them that the simple fact that account sales are forbidden doesn't imply that it never happens.
     Tell them about the birds and the bees & the Easter Bunny, if you think so little of their intelligence.
     Tell them not to leave their money on the street and expect it to stay there, even though stealing is forbidden.
     Teach them about life, Salty!

I mean, you already educate them with "default trust," because they wouldn't know who to trust without it :D

---

* You can spot people avoiding bans, and (likely) don't require absolute proof. This shouldn't be any different.

Hilarious, let's see what you've gone and wrote.

>Some wannabe hack journalist
Devoid of content (other than anger). Are you trying to say this person aspires to be a hack journalist, that he is a hack journalist, or that he merely aspires to be a journalist? What you got here, right off the bat, is whatchamacall an unsound formula. Unparsable.

>spamming
>invents a conspiracy
More loaded language. I understand that you're angry & feel attacked, but unless you're simply venting, try for more neutral language.

>more venting
More venting.

TL;DR: Please, when posting in my thread, try to address the topic & not use it as a soapbox to lash out at the h8ors from.
ty.

Can't you see what TerminatorXL is doing? Posting with an alt. One of the best example. Hope that clears your doubt.


People think

Accounts are sold = Be more careful.
Accounts aren't sold because staff take care of it = Be less careful.

I'm not angry. I'm sure all three apply to him in some way as I'm sure he wants to be taken seriously as a journalist, but writing baseless waffle on a bitcoin blog he has a long way to go to achieve even anything near the title of a 'hack'.


Again, not angry and don't feel attacked, but maybe take your own advice here? (see the op).


I don't see what there is to address here. This thread is just your futile venting from your alt troll account. What are you actually trying to achieve here? Care to actually put forward some solutions that are actually worth something rather than just whinging and being sarcastic?

I dint know that the forum is benefiting from TX's posts. Then why they say he is trolling?




So you mean since accounts are being sold, scams would be less as people will try to investigate before trading/trusting a person? Does every member here follow this and truly investigate if the account was sold or not? By checking the seclog? Is that enough to know if the account was bought or sold?

If account selling is allowed, why can't there be a list or thread where the account buyer/seller state their trade in open? Wouldn't that make it more better and prove that it's worth it? When it happens in the private, why then say that people will move outside the forum/have private transactions which would be worse.

As of now, account selling takes place in private and not in the open. If you are trying to say this decreases scams, sorry to say but it is increasing day in and day out. So many newbies are getting scammed by the same scammer/old scammers as they create new accounts or members have sold their trusted accounts.

This thread is about accounts being sold, not alt accounts. I have created this account, free of charge.
If you wish to discuss alt accounts, please stop derailing my thread & start your own.


No. A false dichotomy. Covered several times in this very thread.
Knowing that stealing is against the law doesn't make me leave my wallet in the middle of the street. OTOH, since there are IRL cops enforcing laws, I don't sleep with a Glock under my pillow & still get robbed. So I guess I can afford to be less careful.

Do you read before typing, or is that sort of thing strictly for teh plebes?


Please read the whole thread before posting, otherwise I'll need to repeat points previously covered - unfair to those who are actually following the thread.
ty.

See, the problem is you keep drawing false equivilancies trying to prove your null point. Rotten food, rape, murder, etc have absolutely no bearing on anything we are talking about here, and you just keep saying the same ideas over and over, even though they have been proven wrong.

Ok, if we ban the sales in general, you are right, people will stop posting about it here. You are correct.

"Just like we enforce the no drugs/guns/CP" Again, correct, we can remove these things from out site. But what you are asking is that we prevent these things from going on on other sites. If people do shady things through IRC or what have you that has absolutely no effect on this forum. If people sell accounts through IRC or what have you that still effects the forum.

Now we are getting somewhere. "If sufficient evidence exists of a user selling accounts, ban it" Ok, who is going to be the judge? Where do we draw the line as to what is sufficient? If I'm 50% sure that you bought that account you are posting on right now, does that give me the right to ban it? What evidence do we use to prove that someone bought an account? Are we going to use our non existant user identification program, or are we going to listen to trolls posting in meta to decide if an account has been purchased or sold?

your proposition opens a whole new can of worms. "If I think so little of their intelligence" to have to warn people that anonymous online non reversable payments can be dangerous if you don't know what you are doing? Isn't it more insulting to someone's intelligence to try to protect them with futile measures against issues that they can prevent themselves? We have two pages of discussion saying that people scamming with purchased accounts is nearly non existant and there are no proven cases besides someone who posted something out of the ordinary before scamming. Why would you want to open up a way for moderator abuse for a nonexistant issue, other than that its "embarassing" to you for whatever reason.

The only way you are going to understand why you are wrong is if you go manage your own forum and try whatever you want to stop account sales. Let me know how that goes.

No, I saw them, but they don't fall under solutions that are actually worth something, and they've all been shot down multiple times time and time again by every single person who has ever proposed them.

:-\ I don't think there was an explanation needed for that statement as you(we) were talking about alts not TerminatorXL's post. I said that using alts is indeed helpful for things we need to hide our real accounts. For example, scam busting, drama, going against a person/community etc... TerminatorXL is doing one of the things and it is clearly seen. I don't think I need to explain this further.


We need to investigate if we are doing a trade. People will be more careful knowing this fact.


Security Log isn't enough. People can't truly know whether an account is sold or not. Only way we can assume is to ask a signed message considering Bitcoin address can be sold.


Because we can't create a list of full bought/sold accounts and who bought it. Another reason is, having an alt is okay.


Don't think so if you think.


Now we can atleast know some of the sold accounts, what if it took outside forum? Higher chance is for "won't".


Newbies always get scammed as they aren't familar with it but this doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent it. The answer is we can't but we can reduce it. Banning sold accounts are not the way, though. Even trusted members turn out to be scammers. It doesn't increase nor decrease by a greater percentage. Both are balanced and trying to change one side will result in bigger problem. Scammers scam. Newbies are being victims as they ain't experienced here. Newbies are victims of most scams IRL too. There is no solution other than wiping scammers which is impossible out there.


I don't want to discuss about your alts. erikalui asked why alts are allowed and I answered.


Leaving a wallet in middle of a street and being less careful is different. Besides, virtual and real is different and we can't compare everything.

>See, the problem is you keep drawing false equivilancies trying to prove your null point.  have absolutely no bearing on anything we are talking about here
Let's take it down to basics:

1. "Rape, murder, etc" - things we do not want to happen. Laws, rules, etc. are created to minimize the occurrence of these these things. (yes/no?)
2. "account dealing" - things we do not want to happen. Laws, rules, etc. are could be created to minimize the occurrence of these these things. (yes/no?)

See the similarity my analogy tries to highlight?


If you are not willing to discuss why these solutions are worthless, responding with invective is simply rude, no better than a child saying NO U!
If you have nothing to add to the conversation, please delete your posts and stop derailing my thread.
ty.

<more>

You're seriously comparing rape/murder to selling forum accounts?

I don't see a lot of people saying that we don't want account dealing to happen. Nor have you given any reason or argument backed by facts as to why account trading is bad.

Exactly. Don't forget CP too. When selling forum accounts becomes against the law we may rethink the policy, but currently it's not.


When he says we, he means I. Not everyone is against the sale of accounts here but even those that are tend to agree with or accept the logic of why they're allowed to be sold here.

It's called an analogy
    a·nal·o·gy
    əˈnaləjē/
    noun
    noun: analogy; plural noun: analogies
        a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

Never stop learning, friend!
You are welcome.

My question: What benefit does the forum get from multiple accounts (especially those accounts created using one IP address)?

Your answer: I said that using alts is indeed helpful for things we need to hide our real accounts.

I don't need any explanation now as you can't understand my question.



A newbie doesn't generally check a TRUSTED user's account. It's like generalizing that all NEWBIES already have been stalking this forum and are aware about ACCOUNT SALES. When I was a newbie, I knew nothing about this and basically went by the trust received by the account.



So every time I or any other member trades here should ask the user for a signed message?  :-\





So why allow it and say it will make a user more aware? Aware of what? Of the fact that accounts are sold/bought? That point is discussed earlier that why is it harmful to sell a TRUSTED account.




No use of the awareness except that members earn by selling/buying accounts.




Hmm...So the final result is, newbies will always get scammed if they don't investigate and they might not even know how to investigate. Preventing account sales can atleast decrease it IMO but nobody wants to even try this method. People who are happy earning money by account sales and newbies are sad that they need to suffer because of that.

What he is trying to say is

   Illegal
      |
  ____|___________
 |                |    
Rape/murder     Account sale

I hope you understand the structure is long. You have snipped many things to achieve your goal. I really like to say "never stop learning" but I think "think twice or thrice before you do a thing" fits better.

@erikalui: Simple answer, no benefit.

The post was a reply to Salty, I understand that you want to sell as many accounts as possible - you're an account dealer :-\
The reason the "(yes/no)" thingy is stuck in there is 'coz I want to narrow down exactly where Salty [not you] stands on the issue.

If he feels that it's great that accounts are being bought & sold, then all further discussion of plausibility of enforcement is moot, don't you agree?

Hope this clears things up :)

@Muhammed Zakir: have no idea of what you're trying to say.


That's what this thread is about, changing the forum policy. Posted, appropriately, in the Meta section.

No, you are using rape/murder's lack of 100% enforcement as justification for your point that even if it is unenforcable, you should try. You say, well rapes and murders aren't 100% solved, but there are still laws! Which is 100% incorrect on all levels.

First, selling accounts whether it is against the rules or not is not a crime, nor is it morally indecent to the same extent a violent crime is. You keep claiming that rape and murder are not 100% stoppable, but there are still laws against them. It is enforcable with life in prison or a death sentence, which is enough to disuade most people. Banning an account wouldn't dissuade anyone who is selling accounts. Second, if you kill someone, there is a body, forensic evidence, etc. If people didn't publicly post about account selling, there would be absolutely no way of knowing that it was happening. What you propose is that moderators scattershot ban people in a completely unfair way, again to solve such a miniscule problem, or what you percieve as a problem.

You are missing the forest for a shrub. Trying to enact a ban on account selling will cause far greater problems. I dont know how you aren't understanding this, but at this point I don't especially care. You have your answer, the community has weighed in. I don't see anyone supporting you, not that it would matter anyway. If you don't like account sales create your own forum, fix the problems you percieve here, and if your rules work better, then survival of the fittest will take its course. I can only argue that the sky is blue so much before it doesn't matter if you keep claiming that it is red.

I don't think I'm the rude one here given your continual condescension, but I and others have already stated why your suggestions are ultimately futile and don't solve anything, you're just not reading my posts:




But your analogy is ridiculously extreme and irrelevant.

irrelevant
ɪˈrɛlɪv(ə)nt/
adjective
adjective: irrelevant

not connected with or relevant to something.

A very wise (may be) person has already argued and compared these two things:


Rules are rules just as laws of a country. If one doesn't follow them, they basically are fraudulent people/criminals/psychos. But saying that rules/laws shouldn't be implemented because it will take place in the private/outside the country is completely illogical.  

I am now politely asking you to stop shitting up my thread. Either back what you say with, as a minimum, attempt at rationality, or stop making this thread unreadable for those who sincerely wish to participate.
ty.

I am now politely asking you to actually say something that hasn't been said a million times before and shot down every single time.

If you don't like the forum go to the other forum or create your own.  :)

Basically .... you can always leave (is this a form of freedom  ;D ?). However this thread is becoming really OT and I don't still understand the real purpose of if. What we're talking about? The buying/selling of forum account or different things?

Are you saying account banning is pointless, and knowing an account could be banned is not a deterrent? But I thought this forum banned accounts?
Am I mistaken?


You do understand that there are different levels of proof required for different transgressions, right? You must, because otherwise you couldn't possibly ban ban-evading accounts, where's the proof? Where's the due process? And yet, I'm sure it happens. How?
Many transgressions are punished on "more likely than not" basis, such as a 5-yr-old being made to stand in a corner for eating his cookies during class - no trial, no jury.

But all this is strictly irrelevant, because you're simultaneously arguing that there's nothing wrong with accounts being bought and sold, or, to use the wording from my previous post, dealing in bitcointalk accounts is not a thing we do not want to happen.

Please make your position on this clear, since I'm not here to waste anyone's time.
If you think that buying & selling forum accounts is a good thing, and are happy that accounts are being traded, what's the point of discussing enforcement possibilities of rules against it?

Yes. This is true even if account sales were somehow 100% eradicated as you would still have the possibility of hacked accounts. A signed message is also necessary to prove the terms of a trade with someone to the community in the event of a dispute. (PM's can also be used however it is more difficult and slower to prove content contained in a PM.

When arguing a stance on something it is advantageous to make multiple points to back yourself up. That way if/when one of your points are shot down (like all of your points have been so far) then you still have something to back up your position. There are two (primary) points to why there should not be a rule against trading accounts

• It is not possible to enforce such rule and attempting to enforce such rule would create a high level of unfairness among innocent people
• There is no harm in trading accounts (there are actually sever positives to trading them)

It is much easier to tell when someone is the same person as someone else then it is to tell when they are not the same person anymore. There would be evidence that someone sold their account any time they change their password, move, get a new computer, switch ISP's among a number of other things.
You need to be fair about any punishment/consequence you impose on someone.

You are clearly trying to provoke me. Fine.
There are two possible reasons why the things I say appear to be a rehash of things which have been said before:
1. I really am treading over covered ground
2. You opinion re. my writing is as valid as my dog's re. quantum physics.

Now go and be angry elsewhere. I know the market sucks and we're all a bit edgy, but take it somwhere else.
ty.

But a person would not NORMALLY go about asking the person to prove he owns the account while having an exchange/trade. Nobody till date has asked me for the same nor have I seen in other sections of this forum that anyone asks for a signed message openly while trading with them.

Hacking happens now as well and there would be such a possibility whether or not the rules are implemented.


Are you a law abiding citizen? Are you saying that the laws are incorrect at all levels? Sorry if that's the case, it wouldn't be wise enough to tell you to implement rules that can help members from getting scammed.









From all the above arguments, I cannot see how the forum is benefiting from these rules of account selling and creating multiple accounts. These rules are basically helping members to earn/scam other members. If everyone is happy with that, I cannot help but pray for those members who are going to be victims of such scams. More cases like this one https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=936429.0 (where the accused had sold his green trust account which was later used to scam a well known scammer) might be reported.

It's called "arguing in the alternative," and it's a complicated thing best left to grownups. What me and Salty are currently in the processes of is establishing where he stands on account dealing.

If he is happy with accounts being bought and sold, discussing the feasibility of banning the practice is a waste of time, because he doesn't want it stopped.
What's the point of discussing how to stop murder if murder is desirable?
Like that, see?
:)

In addition to the enforcement issue: From time to time people have asked me whether they could sell their accounts or use them as collateral because they have an emergency need for money or have come on hard times. I'm not going to tell them they can't do this. It's your account and you can do what you want with it. I find it pretty distasteful (it's like selling your identity), but the act of selling your account does not itself hurt anyone else, and in fact scams via account sales are very rare.

We're talking about buying and selling of forum accounts, and trying to figure out where people stand on the issue.

Initially, I assumed that account dealing was allowed to go on because there is no way to stop it.

Now, it appears that many here think it's not a necessary evil but a good thing, so figuring out how to stop it is a non issue.
We should concentrate on finding new ways to encourage it.
Quickseller is already doing his best :)

People should ask for a signed message when trading with someone and the trade would involve them taking any kind of risk. If there is no risk on a trader's part, then there is no reason to ask for a signed message - for example if you are selling me 1 BTC for 200 LTC and our agreement is that I will send you 200 LTC after I receive 1 BTC from you then I have no reason to ask you for a signed message because I am taking no risk.

It is a good practice to always provide a signed message whenever trading with someone, especially when giving an address to send to as when a dispute arrises you can simply ask your trading partner to provide the signed message you provided and the blockchain should provide the rest of the evidence.
Correct. This is why you should always ask for a signed message when taking risk on a trade.

No it would not be a waste of time. If/when you can make a strong argument that account trading is bad (you have not presented such an argument), then SS would have a leg to stand on to back his position.

---

Does the trust list on your "main" account look something like this:

I think we have received an interesting reply from theymos:


... and I think we can stop here.

Selling accounts hurts trust, thus hurts everyone.
What's the point of having a trust system, when accounts with positive trust are bought & sold, regularly, right here on the forum?

@redsn0w: Please understand that most here know how to read, and theymos, in turn, knows how to write. No need to interpret what he wrote, or to embolden parts of it like a Red-Letter Bible.

I am not talking about already established members/members who already know the meaning of a signed message or how to read it. Scams mainly take place with newbies. Very rarely I have seen established members getting scammed. The scam accusation boards are filled with claims from newbies.

Some don't know the meaning of escrow/signed messages/account sales. They get scammed mainly because of the trust or by an old account that's trusted. I know that it happens very rarely as mainly accounts are bought for Signature Campaigns but some are bought to scam as well and this has been proven to be true as well. A person can go about editing/deleting all his previous messages which reveal the original account holders identity and in that case, a signed message would not work. It would be only theymos who could get back the deleted messages/edited comments.

No it would not be a waste of time. If/when you can make a strong argument that account trading is bad (you have not presented such an argument), then SS would have a leg to stand on to back his position.
[...][/quote]

And that's why I explained to you that arguments in the alternative are best left to grownups - they involve complex concepts like temporality.
Since I clearly can't dissuade you from participating, here's a ELI5 version for you:
Before delving into the mechanics of punishing Bobby, it's nice to figure out if what he did was a bad thing, deserving punishment. Just so we wouldn't waste time.

Not all of us are posting just to bump our post count :)

@erikalui; Quickseller: The trust system is an issue, tho not the one this thread is about.
If you could take the trust discussion to an appropriate thread, that would be nice.

Do you have any examples of this? It seems that most scams are attempted by low level accounts and accounts that are unlikely to have been purchased.

If you can't get a signed message for any reason then it would probably be best to have that person send first or to use an escrow service to protect your money

I posted the case above: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=936429.0 (where the accused had sold his green trust account which was later used to scam a well known scammer).

Krishatnet's account was sold and it had green trust. The person who traded with him trusted him because of the trust rating. But unfortunately, the person who was scammed turned out to be a scammer himself so his case wasn't entertained. There can be more cases as well but they might not have been addressed.

What makes you think the account was sold? I see that you had posted in that thread saying you know him from elsewhere, but unless he gave some kind of proof then him claiming it was sold would likely just be him trying to protect his reputation.

The account was likely worth more then 1.3 BTC (the amount scammed) so the scam in question was not economical for the owner of the account. Sure the victim is out $325, however account owners would have incentives to not scam with such accounts.

Also banning the sale of accounts would likely cause the prices of accounts to decline (there would be an additional risk the account get banned if it is discovered to be sold) so the above incentive not to scam would be removed (or lessened)

Well well, so the stories are true. Just got this from Quickseller:
http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png
Yeah, he is a bit touched.
P.S. this is a throwaway account. It's not about making friends or pretense at trustworthiness. My posts stand or fall only by their content.
The neg rating is 100% false tho. Believe it or not :)

You are correct, the entire conversation is irrelevant. Account selling isn't against the rules, and it was, there would be no way to enforce it, so the only difference would be our liability. "Well your rules right here say account selling is banned, but someone bought an account and scammed me, why didn't you protect me moderators  :'( " Why give people false expectations? Its the same reason that scams aren't moderated.

Accounts are banned, but that is generally to disuade spamming, or people who have become completely disruptive. You are incorrect when you say that transgressions are punished on a more likely than not basis, anything that is a bannable offense requires 100% proof in plain text. Bans aren't done on a whim. The rules were designed in such a way that moderators couldn't abuse anything more than deleting posts that shouldn't have been (which Theymos monitors and corrects if someone makes a mistake) I've seen one accidental ban in the past 3 years, and that was my bad which was fixed in a few minutes.

As I mentioned before, I dont really have an opinion one way or another about whether accounts should or shouldn't be traded at an ethical level. I do know for a matter of fact that banning people for selling or buying accounts would lead to more trouble than it has caused. Speaking of the trouble account selling/buying has caused, have we been able to point to a single confirmed instance? It is a bad idea to ban account selling whether I agree with it or not.

Ahh, I see - for the common good, that sort of thing? Isn't that how dissidents are treated in totalitarian regimes? Political protests -> disrupting the peace?
And the benevolent cadre makes the "correct" decision from loosely defined sorta-laws?
Can't argue with that logic :D


Know from reliable source to be false.


I have given you reasons why bought and sold accounts are a bad thing. Not going to repeat myself for the Nth time, but you better follow your buddy's list and neg rep me - he got the cue from you :) If I had any doubts about the vindictiveness of that douche, they're gone.

http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png

Fine, we are a totalitarian regime. Go elsewhere if you would like to avoid it.

Your reliable source likely knows nothing of the banning process here, again that doesn't matter, I don't care.

You haven't made a single point since your first page of the last thread you started. You have said account selling is bad because rape and murder and buzzwords, also you are embarrased or something. You have yet to point out any specific downside to buying/selling accounts. We have addressed scamming and spamming, but after I answered that, you quickly switched to nonsequitor arguments and empty analogies that have nothing to do with anything. If you want to actually add anything else, you are welcome to do so. Don't make an analogy, you can use single words if you wish to address the issues.

A) Spamming
B) Scamming
C) ...

I honestly don't have a problem ignoring people who just want to scream and hear themselves talk, but on the very slight chance you actually care at all about the topic at hand, I joined the conversation to provide additional info for you to think about. If you don't care, just let me know and I'll stop replying.

How about fuck yourself.
This: http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png is case in point proof of how this shitty forum works.
You claimed I'm Supa's alt, your skeezoid boyfriend tripped over himself and neg repped me. On your word.
Let's see some proof, fucker.
Post it.
ty.
:)

Waiting...

Right, so once again you have proved you don't care about the topic. So this will be my last post. I explained it pretty clearly in the last thread, it was something you had said. Quickseller's actions are their own.

No, fuck YOU.
You said that you require rigorous proof to take punitive actions.
Now, thanks to you, I'm labeled as a scammer - pretty fucking punitive.
I asked to see the evidence against me, you retort with "it was something you said."
Tell me that's not how totalitarian states operate, and I'll call you a lying piece of shit. Again :)

Enjoy stewing in your own fail.

Eh, ok this will be my last reply as you are entitled to some explanation. If I told someone that I think Bitcoins are going to increase in value and they lose money because they bought Bitcoins on my opinion and it goes down, is it my fault? I didn't tell Quickseller to negative rep you, I would have done it myself if I was certain. I still think you are Supa, and if you are, I dont want to tell you how to fix your mistakes next alt you make. I also said that I dont have any better verification methods than you have, so I no way made a statement that could be taken as fact.

I just said that you said something that caught my attention that made me think that you were Supa, nothing more.



I took your next reply as confirmation to what I had said



Full context: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1037815.msg11197886#msg11197886

You... took that as a confirmation?!
You're just batshit crazy, my friend :D

http://makeameme.org/media/created/actually-im-not-f0x8kl.jpg

The thread was long derailed by the time he made that statement (and received confirmation of such). The conversation was literally derailed threads ago lol.

Sounds like a good way to further derail the conversation. I know of a few that were in the past, however I somewhat doubt they still are based on their activity. There are none that I am aware of in the marketplace as of now.

Received confirmation of such? What does that mean exactly?

See Salty's last post on this thread.
He essentially admitted to being supa

Sorry to butt in here, but: you left him negative trust based on someone else's hunch? Based on that??

@Quickseller:
I long to believe in a wise, benevolent God.
That's why I'm going to assume that you & Mr. Spittoon are one and the same boil on the perfect, peach-like butt of Creation.
Just one like you is enough to test my faith in Him, but two?
Clear, purposeful maleficence.

@BlindMayorBitcorn: How could a line starting with "lol, is that what you think?" be misconstrued as a confirmation?
Now imagine a whole belfry full of his kind. Unsupervised, sharp implements in spastically twitching hands, and... running a forum!

It's the bolded one, but well done, you're starting to get it now. Only took 4 pages.


You get what you give.


I'm not angry, but as a troll this is what you desire the most for the people you attempt to troll so you need to keep reiterating it to feel as if you've completed your objective or are winning points but it doesn't work with me. The current 'market' or value of bitcoin today is irrelevant to me and irrelevant to this discussion so please stop pulling things out of your arse and maybe actually offer something of actual worth to this discussion except repeating 'u angry lololol i troll u' over and over like it means anything.


What's the point in any trust system on any site? They're a guide not a definitive you can trust this account badge and every single one on any site can be gamed or abused. eBay or Paypal don't allow accounts to be sold, but guess what you can buy them as easily as bitcointalk accounts. And let's suppose theymos announces right this second that account sales are now prohibited... Changes absolutely nothing regarding 'hurting' trust. Possibly does more damage because people, especially newbs, assume an account could never have possibly been sold or stolen but you seem to not be willing to accept this.

I know the user from another forum and I spoke to him a week after posting on that thread. He then told me he sold the account and told me about his new account as well and on checking his new account, he had an account sales account.


That user is quite reputed and hence I know that the account who bought his account was a scammer. He does not care about the reputation of the sold account as he already sold it.

If account sales is banned, it shouldn't affect those accounts which are already sold/bought but only the future sales would stop. Account prices wouldn't matter.

_______________________________________________________________________________

@OP: This isn't about trust and it's about account sales. I thought that this thread is about account sales  :-\

_______________________________________________________________________________ _

I am listing my points which can be the negatives of selling/buying accounts:

1. The original owner has been spamming earlier to increase his activity and has not been a part of the signature campaign.

The account is sold and now the account (most probably) gets banned as the new owner made few short posts (not really insubstantial) but his post history is full of spam. Account is useless now.

2. The account was banned earlier (once or twice) and the original owner doesn't mention the same. Then the account probably gets banned again. EG: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=994097.0;topicseen

3. The account was earlier loan defaulted and used as a collateral. High chances of it getting a negative trust and hence it cannot be used for earning via a signature campaign.

4. Accounts get hacked and sold and signed messages aren't provided.

5. Accounts with green trust are sold and they can be easily used for scamming newbies.

6. Account sold and the original owner provides fake evidence of his sold account to be charged for scamming and hence makes it get negative trust.


There can be many possibilities and negatives associated with buying and selling accounts and the above cases have been proved true as well. Sixth one may sound illogical but it's definitely a possibility.

Honestly, a trustworthy member won't sell the account he make. I don't think he is trustworthy.


He derails thread and tell others did it.


1 & 2: Buyer should take care of this. It is known fact. This the risk buyer should be willing to take.
3: If the account is used as collateral and if the lender is going to sell it, negative trust feedback will be removed if there is enough proof.
4: Careless mistake of buyer.
5: Can be.
6: Can be resolved if buyer asks signed message.

These are the risks buyer take except 5. Sorry but only 5 can be taken as negative.

I know this user krishatnet is from India and I checked the date of the thread when he sold his account and after that this scamming thread was created and it was about a Vanilla card. It isn't possible for a user to suddenly start scamming after he listed an account sales thread.


He did a mistake of selling a trusted account and hence I find it weird that other members too sell their green trust accounts for money as it gets a higher value. For BTC, they don't mind selling their trust. The buyer doesn't deserve the positive nor the negative trust and when buying/selling trust isn't allowed in the forum, I don't know why selling trusted accounts is allowed.


As theymos said, account selling is like selling your identity. The Government as well doesn't allow a citizen to own more than one national ID proof (eg: Pan card) else people would have started selling that ID proof as well for money. It would be one user with many ID proofs and many citizens trading and working with that same person's ID proof. Similar case is with selling an account where the trust as well is being sold.



I just checked the above posts and am shocked to see pictures and boyfriends being discussed. A serious matter has become a joke.  :-X

If eBay allowed the sale of eBay accounts,
If eBay staff sold accounts on eBay
If most of the items sold on eBay were eBay accounts, like so:
http://s10.postimg.org/relg2xyhl/Capture.png

...well, then I'd agree with you, eBay trust system would be absolutely pointless.
Almost as pointless as you've made the one on bitcointalk.


I admit, you guys have managed to screw the pooch pretty royally when it comes to this forum. The damage you caused is pretty grave, nearly irreversible. Nearly.
This in no way implies that you should continue fucking things up.

STOP, so that we could rebuild.

Yes, the trust system is now completely meaningless, a standing joke that belongs in the trash heap.  Trash it.
You've fucked it beyond redemption in every way, not least by condoning and encouraging buying & selling of accounts, which is, you guessed it, buying and selling trust.

Buying and selling trust is not simply unethical, it's unworkable. Trust can not be bought and sold & remain meaningful.
You can't sell trust for the same reason you can't sell truth.
This is obvious to a child, yet you refuse to see it. Because you can't do without that trickle of pocket change you earn by ignoring it.

Don't forget the thriving micro-loans section. Loans for accounts, accounts as collateral. Quickseller is a natural. ::)

It can be enforced. Anytime someone proves that the account belonged to him earlier restore it. There will be those sellers who will try this, and after a few cases all the buyers will be wary. Don't give any protection to buyers, if you find an escrow doing this ban him too.

Not only are you helping hidden selling of accounts, you're actively helping it by making it open and allowing escrow for it.


In that case they can do so openly. There is no need to make it hidden.

You should probably not do this from your main account, unless you want this:
http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png

We haven't made it anything. You're still not getting the point whilst yet proving mine. Just because ebay accounts aren't openly allowed to be sold on their site doesn't mean they're not sold. Go to any type of hack or carders forum or deepmarket and you'll see the same. Whether we or ebay allow or disallow their sale does not stop it. It happens. Whether in view or out of view.


Nah, we actually do a pretty good job of running things and I'm glad people like you and everybody else who thinks they know better aren't making the rules here. Ban this, remove that, protect me from the badguys blah blah. Go ahead and create your own bitcoin forum if you think you can improve on this one or know what's best for everyone. If it's obviously better then everyone will flock there and you'll make a shitload from adverts or keep it free of ads are run it altruistically. What are you waiting for?


Umm, are you actually processing anything I'm saying? Feedback system on this site or any other is a guide, up to you whether you want to take it into consideration or not. I don't get why you're still banging your head on a wall. Are you saying that if we ban account sales or had always banned accounts sales that the trust system would be perfect or free from people abusing it? Of course it wouldn't. The exact same thing would be happening as it is now only you wouldn't see it. I could easily buy or create an account on here or ebay, buy or earn a few feedbacks from either legitimate or illegitimate sales and nothing's different, though maybe the person I'm selling something to on ebay doesn't think he's going to get scammed because the systems there are obviously perfect and I couldn't possibly have bought the account or faked the feedback because that definitely doesn't go on, right? Change the channel or actually think about what you're saying.

No. I'd rather get rid of the profiteering sleazebags who overran & are continuing to fuck this one.
That's why I started this thread :)

Edit: hilariousandco, registered November 20, 2013 :D
Hang back and watch, n00b.

Good luck with that. Fight tha powa!


TerminatorXL registered: April 20, 2015  :D
Change the channel, n00b.

Unlike many here, I openly stated, in one of my first posts, that this is not my main account. Had I laxer morals, for the price of a cheap dinner I could have purchased an account senior to yours.

Re. "fight the powa": You don't think of yourself as "the powa" just because you're paid to keep the floors swept, do you, scruffy? :D

It's not your main account? No shit. But what makes you think this is my first account? Unless you can prove otherwise I have no reason to believe you have been here any longer than me but that is completely irrelevant anyway. You're probably just a scammer or troll who's been busted or banned a few times and is tired of it so you figure you'll have some fun on a newb account for a while.


No, I'm talking about those who you think are 'profiteering sleazebags' who you laughably think you can take down or even change anything here. You're powerless to do anything apart from low to mid range troll. And scruffy lol. These are some quality insults/trollings you're coming out with.

You mean this is not your main account? Shocking! :D
So, which is your main account, you totally legit above-board staffer you? And how many more have you got, if it's not indelicate to ask?


You are the profiteering sleazebag. Or, rather, sleazebag-in-waiting, sucking up through the ranks.
Re. "scruffy" - slang for mod, as in https://derpicdn.net/media/W1siZiIsIjIwMTIvMTEvMjUvMjNfNTdfNDdfOTQ1XzE2MzI3MF9fVU5PUFRfX3NhZmVfaW1hZ2VfbWFjcm9fX2Z3ZHNsc2hfbWxwX2Z3ZHNsc2hfX3NjcnVmZnkiXSxbInAiLCJ0aHVtYiIsIjI1MHgyNTAiXV0/163270__safe_oc_image-macro_-fwdslsh-mlp-fwdslsh-_milky-way_milkmare-of-trottingham_futurama_scruffy_janitor.jpg
Lurk moar, n00b :)

Satoshi. Forgot my password to my account and wallets though and theymos wont let me have it back cos I can't sign a message. Bad times. Probably could sell that account for a pretty penny too :(.


I don't profit a cent off of account sales, but some say profiteers others say entrepreneurs and some just futilely whinge at everything they are powerless to change.

Not joking.
Which account do you belong to, sock?

>some say profiteers others say entrepreneurs
Hahahahaha

>don't profit a cent off of account sales
because "sleazebag-in-waiting, sucking up through the ranks." Just keep munching the right D, and you'll get there, my enterprising young friend :)

Which do you belong to, sock. Not joking.


Hahahaha at everything you've come out with.


Thanks. Will do.

My reputation is irrelevant, I'm not a forum staffer. Forum bureaucrats, wielding their awesome power over us hoi polloi, must abide by higher standards.
Now what's your main account, sock?

P.S. Your buddy Quickseller/ACCTSeller et. al., the other captain of bitcointalk economy, took away the neg trust for some reason >:(
http://s29.postimg.org/4192qia5z/Capture.png

Why the backpedaling? He was so sure...

This is my main one. And I thought I was just a scruffy janitor? My rep should be irrelevant if all I do is clean up mess but now you think we should be a superior class. Make your mind up.

More backpedaling.


You know who else asked for proof of a sock? Your buddy Quickseller. Right before being cornered into admitting he was ACCTSeller.

Step up your game, scruffy :)

No it isn't. It is my main one. There is no backpedaling. I don't see where I ever said I had another either, but I think you obviously read what you want to believe. Step up your game, troll  :).

^^Alrighty then, belligerent n00by n00b confirmed.  
Discovered bitcoin & joined the forum at peak price, right before the bubble burst.
Now broke, angry, & eking out a living by white-knighting various petty crooks.

Carry on :D

I think this thread should be moved in the Off topic (and also other thread that are here in the meta section).



Why are you fighting from your 'alt account', why don't you use your main account?

I never said it was my first account, I said it was my main one. And I bought my first coins around £50-70, so still quite in profit, but I think you've lost your composure now and have just descended into making stuff up and acting childish. Well done. Carry on.

As it has been said many times that it is impossible to detect all sold accounts so it's better to allow it.
If you really got so many problems , go make your own forum bitch. Though it is true that the DG and Auc. Section is full of Account selling Threads but well it's a marketplace and people are supposed to sell things/DG there . So why not forum accounts when it's legal ?
Stop whining -_-

Because you would know, had you bothered to read this thread before asking. I admit, many have derailed this thread with bitter personal attacks and other catty faggotry, making it a pain to read. Here's the TL;DR:
http://s16.postimg.org/pdkagqjdx/Capture.png

The muppet defending himself is the subject of this story here:

http://s2.postimg.org/c824do2tl/Capture.png

A vindictive little forum accounts dealer going by Quickseller, ACCTSeller, etc., etc. has already left this account a nef trust rating, removing it the following day, for reasons unknown.

You can see why I'm hesitant to use my main account.

@koelen3: you too. Read the whole thread; the issue has been addressed.
It's not as much about accounts being sold, it's that they're being sold right here, on bitcointalk, with staffers facilitating the deals.

@hilariousandco: UR like, totally OG :D

And yet you're still here thus proving yourself and any of these silly allegations wrong, though I suspect you're trying to get yourself banned so you can say look! told you so much like cozylife did. The only reason you're using an alt is because you're a coward and a petty troll. And I'm not the subject of that article, the Pulitzer Prize winning Rick Mac Gillis just happened to mention me in his damning expose of the corruption here at bitcointalk. I found it quite humorous but also equally sad at the same time.

I think it is better to "fight" with your main account, because as hilariousandco said:



However I think this thread will not have a real end, it will be only a post to continue argue without resolve any problem.

Cowardice plays no part in a forum where established, trusted accounts are bought and sold. What, exactly, would I be risking, above the price of a decent dinner?
Simply don't want to give you the satisfaction of knowing you've cost me the price of a hero account.
Perhaps "too thrifty," but "cowardly"?
Nah.

On a more practical note:
Is there any reason, other than butthurt & your pay-to-spam sig ad, for you continuing to shit up this thread?

@redsn0w: The intent of this thread was not to fight, but to discuss.
You've asked me to explain why I'm not posting from my main account, and I did.
If my case relied on reputation rather than facts and logic, I would have bought a trusted account to post with.

Funny enough, in your trolling you did manage to touch on another topic that is a valid concern. I know you don't care to think about things in a way that isn't completely ignorant of common sense, but a hero account sells for over 1 BTC. No idea what a staff account would sell for, but trusted accounts would hypothetically cost more. You mentioned you could buy an account that outranks hilariousandco for the price of a decent dinner. Correct me if I'm wrong but Legendary Accounts sell for over 2 BTC. I'd say $500 is a pretty decent dissuasion. What keeps people from buying trusted accounts is the cost. Accounts are worth more than their reputation, their value is also derived from the months/years put into them. So say I could buy a mildly trusted Legendary account for 5 BTC, I might find someone who would trust me with a couple BTC. If I scammed them or used the account to commit trust abuse, I'd be out some money. That said, if you still believe that scammers aren't financially motivated, and they scam just for giggles, I guess that logic wont make sense to you. But most people would agree that scammers aren't about losing money on a scam.

*edit* Still on topic, something else you mentioned was that if you could sell Ebay accounts, then Ebay's feedback system would be worthless. Again you are correct. Check the digital goods section. I took a quick peak and I saw more than a few Ebay accounts for sale. The 10% sellers fees are what make up for Ebay being a scammers haven. Ebay will just pay you back sometimes because that is their business model.

I posted here because you are right though, the thread is going off topic. Everyone please try to return to the topic in the OP. As long as TerminatorXL wants to debate account selling, they should be allowed to. Before you say I'm trying to save face or something, I just think the thread is pointless, and will die itself since you don't actually have anything to say rather than insults and off topic arguments.

I think you'll find you're the one who has been 'shitting it up' from the start and is bizarrely majorly 'butthurt' over such a little thing as account sales, but sure, getting paid to play with trolls is great fun. You know as well as I do that forum accounts are not banned for merely speaking out against staff or for criticizing their policies so you're just using this as an excuse, but if you're only risking a 'decent dinner' then surely you have nothing to lose? I'm sure there's another reason why you don't use your main account(s) (an existing ban, perhaps?). Maybe instead of making childish personal attacks and derailing your own thread you should get back on to the point of the topic at hand. You've still yet to make a sound argument as to why the banning of account sales isn't futile but feel free to get back on track.

Not a little thing.
Sure, the money you get is pocket change, but the damage it has caused to the forum is serious.
If the bitcoin community is judged by this forum, we're nothing but a bunch of  bumbling crooks and inept street hustlers, stealing as much or more from each other than from outsiders.

I realize you're new, but please read some of the posts from the early days of this forum, and compare.
It's an embarrassment. I, for one, am embarrassed. And I'm sure Satoshi would not be proud :-\

Thank you, you are actually expressing why you think its embarrassing. I now understand what you mean. First off, the Bitcoin forum is not the bitcoin community. It is a forum managed by a single person, not by the bitcoin community as a collective. The larger problem is that people judging the Bitcoin community don't know what they are judging. When Charlie Shrem was arrested, news articles read "CEO OF BITCOIN ARRESTED" my point being, you can't change people's perceptions. If you mean that by officially banning account selling so that people looking in will have a better impression, you might be right. But, as far as the internals, we have explained why it causes issues. It is unenforcable in a fair way. Your argument has been, just because its hard to enforce doesn't mean you shouldn't try, if I'm now understanding you correctly. That just isn't the case in this situation. Officially banning accounts couldn't discourage account sellers in any way. If we ban their accounts, they would just make another. They aren't motivated by a single account that we could ban, they are motivated by a collection of accounts that they own.

Please explain how it has caused damage when, for the tenth time, whether we allow or disallow the sale of accounts it changes absolutely nothing. The beauty of bitcoin is it can be used for everything by everyone good or bad, but what it is used for is up to the individual. Bitcoin gives people freedom and that's what satoshi intended. We've got entrepreneurs to child pornographers using it, criminals to charities, altruistic libertarians to greedy capitalists and everything in between. Don't like one of them? Suck it up and deal with it. And you don't know how satoshi feels about anything. Maybe he's immensely proud that an account on a forum he created is now worth hundreds of dollars. Maybe he finds it humorous. Maybe he's disgusted by it and what he created in bitcoin or what people now use it for. Maybe the opposite. Nobody knows, but one thing I do know is you're projecting your own beliefs onto him and I doubt you're no saint either.

Didn't realize it was that much, haven't been following the bitcointalk account market. But yeah, I didn't mean McDonald's.


At the risk of repeating myself, the trusted accounts aren't used to scam directly, but to lend credibility to less trusted accounts. See TAT. Do you really think a n00b going by
"cryptocyprus" would have raised millions on this forum without the help of a trusted member?  Yeah. nah.


In that case, trust is irrelevant for eBay accounts, since, as long as you trust eBay, everything works out.
Bitcointalk accounts aren't backed by a central entity, and the trust you place in them is not a proxy for trust in some central entity.

To be useful, it must be real. If accounts are bought and sold, it is not. It's a charade.
But thanks for taking this thread back on topic.

BTW, do you still think I'm Supa?

Trust can be either relevant or irrelevant. It's a guide for you to make your own mind up on. You can disregard the entire system or judge feedback and users on a case by case basis. You can probably buy accounts or memberships to the majority of sites on the internet. I can buy a degree from Harvard or fake passport online. Does that make those institutions a charade too? People can only protect themselves at the end of the day and it's most certainly not the job of the staff or admin's of this forum to do so, nor would it be possible, hence the rules we have here whether people like them or not.

Exactly. It looks really bad. You're probably been around this long enough for the effect to have dulled, but try to imagine what it looks like to the outsiders. And I don't think I'm unique when I tell you I've been here for YEARS before I knew that accounts are being bought and sold. I've heard about it occasionally, but *sincerely* assumed that it was either someone trolling. It simply hasn't donned on me that it was allowed.
What makes you think that new users know it's happening? (since the "it's better for n00bs to see it happening in the open" argument has been used)

Has it been this bad in the past?

But anyway, banning the sale of accounts *ON THIS FORUM*, and banning those who facilitate such dealing (escrow services, etc.) would do wonders for public perception.
Publicly distancing ourselves from it is also important.

The quote above is just your responses, didn't want to clutter the thread reposting stuff. Just want to say I'm glad that we are actually discussing this now, I've got not problem discussing the topic thoroughly, perhaps misunderstandings happened early on.

I mentioned a while ago, that account selling in a way discourages scamming. It isn't a 100% thing, but in some situations, if you can sell your account for 2 BTC, and you are in need of money with no hope, selling your account is a valid option, or using your account as collateral for a loan anyway. Forum accounts gain their sometimes obscene value due to paid advertising signatures, if you can get 0.4 BTC per month just by posting as a hero member, your account becomes more valuable, making scamming a more expensive activity.

You are correct again, Ebay sucks, but trust is irrelevant because of their "buyers" or "sellers" protection, although they still mess that up relatively often. They can use their 10% that they take off the top to pay off people that get scammed The forums is not Ebay, we don't collect any money from account sales, we don't have a team of people to monitor sales and such, and that has never been our intention. As far as marketplace activity, think about sites like Ebay where their sole purpose is selling things, and they collect fees. Craigslist, which is primarily for selling things, but they don't collect fees, and then there is the forum that is not primarily for sales, nor do we collect fees. Staff involvement in the marketplace is very minimal.

As far as your concern about buying trusted accounts to lend trust to others, that is a valid claim too, but you still only have one shot at it, if that. If you buy that trusted legendary account for 5 BTC, and you start trusting a bunch of sleezy people, that trusted legendary account you just paid 5 BTC is no longer trusted. If someone could pull it off so that they give some trust to some other scamming accounts and try to get multiple scams going, there is still an incredibly high chance that some of the forum's resident scambusters, or just regular people will pick up on it, making that 5 BTC investment null. Financial disuasion is the name of the game. Frankly, a scammer is far better off trying their luck with a dicing site, than purchasing an account and trying to abuse people with it or scamming with it.

I will say, how account selling/buying, scamming, and paid signature ads all tie into each other was not something done by design, it just sort of ended up like that.

I dont know if you are Supa or not, he but some of your behavior matched to a tee, and you said something he had said to me quite a while ago exactly. If you were just frustrated because I was misunderstanding you, tis all water under the bridge, lets keep on going with a rational discussion.


See, I don't especially care how it looks, but how it works. We have seen time and time again, that if we just ignore an issue and push it under the rug, it can become way more harmful than it is out in the open. Sure it may not look pretty from the outside, but I'm more against people being scammed, than people thinking something looks scammy. Account selling/buying is a relatively new thing, I think it came around the same time as paid advertising signatures, because paid advertising signatures gave forum accounts a steady income and therefor a value. The thought process is, if we banned it, we couldn't stop people from doing it anyway. If we tried to stop it, people would just evolve better ways to sell undetected. If you are buying a gun or something like that and they are illegal, you can't go have a safe transaction in a bank or at a federal firearms dealer, you have to do it in some parking lot or shady area where the transaction might not go the same way. Same principals applies here, account sales are a lot safer if done in the public, and when people know that its going on, they can prepare themselves more readily.

Trust is not only relevant, it's essential for a thriving community. It is the glue that holds communities together, it allows for frictionless commerce, it lets us sleep with our doors unlocked, it lets us not spend billions on armies.

Anything that works towards degrading trust is "bad," is divisive, is not hugs & sunshine & should be immediately killed. With fire.
This is a prima facie truth that shouldn't need to be explained.

You have to keep in mind the technology involved here. Trust is non existant on its base level when you are dealing with anonymous people and a non reversable currency. In my opinion, no one can earn trust, its just a matter of what you can trust someone with statistically based on self interest. For example, why do we trust escrow agents? They could just run off with your money just as well as anyone else. Well, self interest is the answer. If they make enough money in fees, there is financial motivation not to scam. If someone gives me 1 BTC to hold in escrow, I could A) Steal the money or B) Not steal the money, complete the transaction, and get myself maybe a .01 BTC fee. Why would I want 1/100th of what I could scam? Because that party that is happy with my service will then recommend me to someone else, and I'll collect more fees. Generally, I trust people who have less to gain by screwing me over than they have to gain by being fair.

The trust system is not an exact science. Its a feedback system. I've traded with confirmed scammers on a regular basis, and I've traded with accused scammers. If I gauge that there is a risk to my Bitcoins, whether it be an unknown trader, or a scammer, I'm going to take appropriate measures. Thats not to say that someone couldn't buy a trusted account. But someone with an account worth 5 BTC, I might only trust them with 1 BTC. Theres no point in scamming me for 1 BTC and losing 4 BTC. If an escrow agent hasn't scammed someone for 100 BTC, because they figure they can make more than 100 BTC by operating legitimately, would I trust them with 100 BTC? Not necessarily. What if someone bought that person's account? Well, if the escrow agent values their name/reputation/service at over 100 BTC, a scammer is going to have to fork up more than 100 BTC to buy that account.

See what I mean? If you want a safer trading experience, use a website created for trading. The forum is first and foremost about discussion. We aren't going to inact any rules that benefit trading, if they could negatively impact the forum's primary objective.

Yes! We're on the same page, never thought this was some sort of a sinister plan to make some pocket change. The fallout is pretty bad tho.
It's not even something I can easily quantify or point a finger at, more of a general "feel" of the forum changing from hanging out with a bunch of friends to that guarded feel you get when scoring dope in a bad part of town.


But it's a feedback loop. If something seems scammy, you deal with it as you'd deal with scammy things, you jockey for advantage, and it becomes scammy. That's why seemingly superficial stuff isn't as superficial as it seems. From strictly unhippy, utilitarian perspective, it pays to appear good.
A rewording of Vonnegut's “Pretend to be good always and even God will be fooled.”

I think one thing that should be pointed out is that, in the US, places that have stricter gun control laws tend to have higher violent crime rates. Places like Chicago, Washington DC, and Detroit are all notorious for their high violent crime rates, but they also have very strict gun control laws.

According to the Cato Institute (http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/gun-control-myths-realities), states with laws that allow citizens to have concealed carry licenses (states that allow their citizens to have a concealed gun) have a 24% lower violent crime rate, a 19% lower murder rate, and a 39% lower robbery rate then states that forbid their citizens to have a concealed weapon.

The bitcoin scene has always been a shark tank, I don't think that there are more bad people than anywhere else, or that the bad guys are figuring out new ways to be shady. If you give a good guy an opportunity to act in a bad manner without getting caught, they might not actually be quite so good. Bitcoin sort of caters to that behavior, hence why I only trust financial motivation like I explained in my last post. Maybe the vibe is just being projected more as of late, but in general I believe that the amount of scams that go on has been decreasing, and by that I mean the petty scams, I have no comment on the long cons, IE Pirateat40, Tradefortress, Tradehill, The GAW stuff etc. For every good thing, there is also a downside. Bitcoin gives people financial freedoms that you can't have anywhere else. The trade off is some of the protections, and sadly one of those tradeoffs is you have to learn how to protect yourself from scams, something that doesn't always come natural to a society guarenteed by buyers protection programs. If you learn how to protect yourself though, you quickly find that without the 10% fees, you start saving a lot of money, and its a great system.

I feel the same way that the feel of the forums is changing, but rather than from a trading/trust point of view, I see it as changing due to spam.




What you are talking about here is the long con. You are right, I have no solution for preventing those. I mentioned them in my last paragraph. What do you have to guarentee that Walmart isn't going to take your payment and run off and scam you? Law enforcement and their own financial self interest. We haven't had the best luck with law enforcement in the bitcoin scene, and thats one of those things that comes along with the financial freedom. Ebay calculated how much they need to take off the top to guarentee against scams. Of their 10%, Id imagine the majority goes to paying salaries and profits. If we learn as individuals how to do the same calculations, that 10% on top that we pay minus the salaries and profits can go just to the cost of doing business.

Exactly. That's why we shouldn't create situations which provide incentive for [thing_you_don't_want_to_happen].

I'm sure this has been covered before, but why does the forum even allow sig ads? The forum profits from them indirectly at best, and possibly loses money on [official] forum ads that theymos auctions. Seems ...counterintuitive? You agree that it's the main incentive for account farms & account dealing, what would be the drawback of banning them?
I know I'm opening another can of worms, but.

You are right once again, the forums doesn't gain money by allowing advertising signatures, but we aren't really about profits here. The general policy here is to only ban the things that cause issues that can't be fixed, rather than banning paid advertising signatures, we would rather to help fix the issues they cause and continue allowing them, because from the user's point of view, its pretty cool to be able to post regularly and make some bitcoins. The problem is the spam created when it goes beyond just posting regularly.. We all acknowledge that paid advertising signatures promote spam, and we have been discussing ways to limit this for a while now. Freedom of speech includes freedom to promote whoever you want, for financial motivations or not. We are trying to figure out ways not to limit/censor the users here, but put tighter restrictions that hold campaign managers more responsible to reduce spam.

*edit*
The only way I see to remove the incentives for things we don't want to happen, would be to remove the marketplace section all together. There would probably still be paid advertising signatures, and also account trading for that reason.

Personally, I see paid advertising signatures as a reason to legitimize account selling. What could only be useful for scamming before, can now be used to make an honest buck with paid advertising signatures. The spam created is another issue, and thats where we will start.

Citing the Cato Institute is a bit like citing BP re. advantages of offshore drilling. Also confusing cause & effect.
The reason those places opted for stricter gun control is because of violent crime rate. Don't want to go off on that tangent, love guns myself, but not in this thread.

How would you feel about me citing forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/05/14/disarming-realities-as-gun-sales-soar-gun-crimes-plummet/)? They say that many (40%) of guns used in violent crimes were acquired via illicit means (illegally), and another 37% acquired the gun they used for their violent crime from family or friends (for a total of 77%). They also say that violent crime has heavily declined when gun sales are strongly up.

I know there have been a number of studies that correlates higher gun violence with higher gun control laws, with violence increasing after stricter gun control laws go into effect.

The point I am making is that if you have more guns used in violent crimes when gun sales are (nearly) banned, then why would it not be the case that more scams would occur with purchased accounts if account sales were (nearly) banned.

This pay-to-post thing just seems like the polar opposite of what a public forum (in the old sense of the word) is about. Not everything in the world should be monetized just because it can be. The point is paid sig space leads to account dealing which leads us here - more bad than good. This is a private forum, presumably meant for discussing money, not for making it as we talk.

@Quickseller: Not sure why you want to introduce another hot-button issue into a thread that's already pretty polarized. I'm not a gun control crunchy, I've used the example of sleeping with a gun because I had, because I had to. This is not what this thread is about tho.

If people can make a passive income for their regular discussion, that is such a cool thing. It's an incentive to come and chat, why not earn a few bits? Just because some people are doing it wrong and spamming, doesn't mean we should also punish those who are using their paid advertising signature responsibly. We are taking a stab at limiting what those people spamming can do, while still allowing those responsible enough to not spam.

Yeah I was sort of referencing gun control but not in the crontroversial pro vs against manner, but instead in the sense that publicly and openly trading a neutral object that could be used for good of bad is best done in a safe and open place. I compare the account selling issue to selling guns in a gun store, vs in a parking lot. We can't stop account sales from happening in the parking lot, so why not allow people to do it in the shop.

But that's not what's happening. What's happening is people are farming accounts, selling accounts, buying accounts, and spamming & scamming from those accounts.
Not passive, and nothing to do with chatting.


Now imagine that you're running a gun store.
A guy walks into your shop, sets up a table & starts selling child porn. He also regularly shits on your floor, making your shop less attractive to your customers.
Are you obligated to let him keep doing it?
He has an excellent argument for you to let him stay: If you don't let him sell CP in your store, he'll just be forced to sell it in the parking lot, so why kick him out?