Bitcoin Forum

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=358020

Look at his unconfirmed feedback there is a positive trust from deluxeCITY that says "Was escrow for a trade for me, very professional service will use again for sure. A + ".

deluxeCITY (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357282) is an alt of Quickseller. He left himself positive trust and should be removed from the trust system as his sent feedback cannot be trusted if he is leaving himself fake feedback.

Any proof?

Would be a strange turn as Quickseller just preached me about about leaving that campaign.

Lol. You are wrong about my alts.

The account in question is not mine as of now.

I am curious to know how you claim to know one of those accounts are banned.

This is not proof.

So what you are saying is you sold the account and then the buyer used the reputation of the new account to leave you feedback?

Those are your accounts come on don't play stupid I researched this quite a bit. Maybe one or two might be wrong, but I have solid proof most are yours.

Oh and by the way why is Muhammed Zakir selling some of your accounts are you business partners?

Why don't you post actual proof. Why don't you post from your "main" account instead of an obviously fake/impersonation account?

I have no way to control what any of my accounts that I have previously sold do. (This is not saying that account ever was mine).

Obviously you have not done enough waisted research because this account has been under my control for months! Just take a look at recent posts you plonker we have very different styles of writing plus we post in 'totally' different threads. He never ever posts in gambling or any of the threads i do, your research lacks research.

I left him deserved trust because he could have saved me from losing my funds in a trade, i choose a trusted escrow i have dealt with before. One last thing because i won't be posting hear anymore! Why does he care about 'untrusted feedback' LOL! Surly you can see this is back to front and he would give positive to this account lol! Check my feed back untrusted and you will see who i traded with using Qs as escrow.

Case closed newbie.

So you bought the account from Quickseller?

Quickseller himself admitted: "The account in question is not mine as of now. "

That was not an admission. I also stated that I was not saying the account in question was ever mine.

No i never said i brought the account from Quickseller did i you are not really on the ball are you. I said my account has been under my control for months! This account is only months old, you fill the gaps in as you wish ;)  Nothing to say about totally different writing styles? Recent posts? Why untrusted feedback is more important than trusted? Why i should not use a trusted escrow i have used before? So many questions and no answers lol

OP desperation =


http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/h428/keithh409/HardForum/grasping%20straws_zpsife8nevd.jpg (http://s1109.photobucket.com/user/keithh409/media/HardForum/grasping%20straws_zpsife8nevd.jpg.html)

Statements like that aren't helping your trustworthiness. It's obvious to even a complete idiot that the account was yours you created it yet you'll sit there and dodge the question. Did you ever think this "act" might be hurting your trust more than helping it?

Please pay attention to the thread. Quickseller sold an account and the account then left him positive trust. He can deny that the account was his but this can be proved very simply, so I will wait for Quickseller to be honest and let us know what exactly happened with that account and the feedback he recently received from it.

Sorry as "admit" is the wrong word. You always twist your words and leave the reader in suspense. I felt that you might have worked as an escrow for the account in question and hence owned it for a while.

@OP: deluxeCITY does not seem to be an alt of Quickseller as he hasn't capitalized the letter "i" while Quickseller always takes care of his capitalization and grammar.  ;)

Anyways, I notice that you have a lot of FANS here on BCT and it's tough for you to handle them now.

Yes I have since noticed the account has been sold. Quickseller owned this account until February 2015 when it was sold. The new owner then traded with Quickseller using that account and then left him feedback from it. This is not what I thought had happened when I posted the OP I had assumed Quickseller still owned the account and had left himself positive trust.

Pay attention to the image as it's worth a thousand words. Either post hard proof or STFU, these "hit man" threads have gotten old.
All you and your ilk try to do is smear someone, hoping their trust will fall and the community sees them as worthless; proof be damned. Am I right?
At least have the nut sack to accuse under your main account.

To be so good with wordses...
Pro sophist confirmed :D

> Quickseller sold an account and the account then left him positive trust.
Works for me.
Did you remember to leave nice trust for the account you sold, to return the favor?

How would you possibly have additional information then what you had when the OP was published now then what you had when the OP was made?

It seems to me that you are simply trolling.

Quickseller: Did you sell the account in question, and did that account consequently leave you positive feedback?

Im sorry but that is none of your business.

Either way that doesn't matter. He clearly stated that the reason for the positive feedback was that I acted as escrow for a trade which I did do, and which can be corroborated by other sent and received feedback.

You're a lying sack of shit, on default trust, who is not only selling forum accounts, but gaming the trust system.
Yeah, it's my business.

Post from your main account and I might reconsider.

Supa please fuck off out of my thread before you get friendlychemist'ed, literally the most annoying scammer on the planet. Your shitposting is detracting from the issue at hand.

I am not Supa. But impressive SR ref, you gonna hire R&W to do the deed, like the other badass?

http://s3.postimg.org/skwj2kj7n/ross1.jpg

@Quickseller: Why? You're not posting from your main account.

You keep making insubstantial claims, please provide proof rather than spewing what appears to be nonsense.

But Quickseller is not denying this "nonsense."

Why don't you bother to answer the question asshole?

If you don't think I can find your main account then you are sorely mistaken. Just because you likely paid the tor tax and are hiding behind tor doesn't mean I can't figure out who you are.

Why would I care In fact why do you care so much what my alt is so you can give me negative trust, for what exactly?

What is the point of hiding jackass? I know with a good amount of certainty that I already gave your account negative feedback, most likely recently. Probably within the last few weeks.

Your account can't get anymore negative feedback from me, at least not more that can do additional damage to it.

I'm confused about why will he do it ?
there's no point in it!
He is already a Trusted Escrow so some more feedback about being escrow won't increase anything.
The account deluxeCITY is not in DefaultTrust , so it doesn't matter either. Why is it a big deal anyway?

Hmm.  Good question.
And why are you not posting from your main account? This is the first post from Quickseller (edited multiple times as the sales progressed):

IIRC Quickseller sold his account. I think it was Legendary. I saw a post of his saying about this. Will post the link if I find it.

Was it a "Trusted" account?  Do you remember the nick? :D

I'm fairly certain I know whose alt it is and whose alt it isn't. Don't think it's worth sharing it.

Quickseller, I recommend you just state: "The account was mine" or "The account was never mine" to avoid unnecessary arguments starting.

As I have mentioned previously, it really isn't anyone's business which accounts I own currently or what I have owned in the past. All I will say that I do not own any account that I have received trust from and all the trust I have on my profile was either the result of a trade or the result of someone leaving unsolicited feedback.

As others have pointed out the sections that deluxeCITY has posted in are different then the ones I frequent and I appearently take care about spelling in grammar while he appearently does not.

Nothing about the situation is against the rules nor is it scammy behavior nor is it unethical

I don't think so. Nope, I don't.

Just to clarify: Quickseller is now his main account. The account in question was the one he (probably) used earlier(his first account maybe). AFAIK he is now using Quickseller as his main. I guess it is because Quickseller is more trusted than his first account.

tl;dr: Quickseller is most probably the main.

^
If by "main account" you mean "account being used now," then this is my main account :-\

No but it can happen. The "account he is giving more importance to" is the "account he is using now".

lol and double lol.  sorry, couldn't help but point out the irony in this failed quickseller masterbation.  love that he managed to do a spelling and grammar fail in the very sentence in which he was stroking himself about spelling and grammar ...back to our regularly scheduled mudslinging controversy ...


MZ, I know you're always careful to support whoever you see as the most powerful in a given context, but how on earth would you have any information about what account the person known (inter alia) as Quickseller considers to be his "main account"?

Is he trusted?

Who the hell is this guy?

How many deals are phony or fabricated who knows?

I should have wrote "AFAIK" first. The first is incorrect. I don't support person with more power unless he should be. I support persons with least/no power too. See Quickseller's feedback on my trust page. He thinks I was vouching for a scammer.

I don't find any such feedback on your trust page.  I see one from QS saying he escrowed for you and it went fine.  I see several from you saying that QS is the man.  Perhaps I'm missing something or perhaps it was removed.  Nevertheless, you notably chimed in echoing quickseller's echoing of tradefortress charges against me during quickseller's smear attack on me, even adding facts which where clearly incorrect, saying "bots were against the rules on coinchat" (they weren't).  Since then I've noticed that you're constantly on the side of the poweful in these discussions on meta.  I apologize if I'm out of line, but that's been my observations.

Yes, I did agree to Quickseller.


You should mention "bot" in username which you didn't do.


I agree with that points and I support it.


No problem.

The rules weren't provided to me until *after* I was booted, despite my having asked tradefortress what were the rules for bots, where to find them, etc.  Nevertheless, this is off topic here, let's leave it

Why is Quickseller the target of so many threads in the Meta section? Feeling like a Vod 2.0 situation up in here.

Tomatocage left his alt account positive trust and you don't see threads dedicated to it.  Unless that person is showing inherently untrustworthy behavior, it isn't really a big deal in my eyes.

Until there is solid proof of dishonesty or actual scamming, these threads should be locked to prevent pointless arguing.

I can't speak to the facts concerning most of these threads.  I, however, was the victim of a smear attack by quickseller in which he deployed an alt to troll me and then dug into my past until he found a false accusation by a known scammer (from years ago) and then used it as a reason to neg-rep me with his main account.  He did this in a (failed) attempt to get me kicked out of the signature ad campaign I was a part of, presumably as vengence for crossing him in public (ie, calling him out for his hotheadedness and suggesting that calling people idiots is not called for).  That's my experience with him, as to the rest of these threads, you'll have to take them on their merits, I think.

I've disagreed with Vod in the past many times regarding his enforcement of Microsoft policies and intellectual properties.  Three striking differences between Vod and Quickseller which I notice are that (1) Vod maintains his cool and doesn't resort to name-calling and mudslinging when people disagree with him; (2) Vod actually removes negative trust when people talk with him about it (ie, he doesn't try to hold people's pasts over their heads for all time); (3) Vod doesn't seem to go on vendetta missions in which he's going to give negative trust to anyone who disagrees with him (if this were the case, I'd have negative trust from him since I don't agree that Microsoft policies should be dictating trust ratings on this board).

The other thing to keep in mind is that quickseller is a known account farmer/seller so in adding neg-reps to accounts, he's actually driving up the value of his non-neg-repped farmed accounts.  It's a black and white case of conflict of interest.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest

As far as I know, Vod has not been associated with any such behaviors.

Negative trust for disagreements is against the limited trust rules. I looked at the thread in which you posted about receiving negative feedback and Quickseller posts no lies about you. You did fraud TF even though he is a known scammer. As far as buying/selling accounts, I'm sure Badbear knows about that and still has him under DefaultTrust so you probably won't get far with that argument.

Of course he's not going anywhere with his argument.

1. There are no official rules for this forum, so it's pointless to accuse anyone of breaking them.
2. Mods take pride in "interpreting" the unofficial rules.
3. Quickseller owns many quality accounts (for all I know, you're one) with which to create an illusion of of overwhelming popular support.
4. Seeing a bunch of socks sucking each other off & swapping spit is nauseating. Stop.
:)

Nope, sure didn't.  I'm surprised you seem to feel like you know what happened between me and TF over 2 years ago.  Could it be that you're taking TF's unsubstantiated accusations as fact?  Hard to see how you'd have some sort of access to TF's server logs or to my computer's history from so long ago.  Surprising that you're not put off by the fact that TF is a known scammer and he accused me in that thread of taking 4 different amounts of money and then finally settles on "everything I ever withdrew".  That seems right to you?  Hmm.  Well, you're opinions are for you to make.

Did you also read through the threads where quickeseller uses and alt to troll me and threaten me?  It's all good, facts are facts and at the end of the day, folks like quickseller don't end up with too much power for very long.  Eventually the truth comes out (like it did with tradefortress).It's all good.  It's up to badbear to consider and stand behind who he considers as trustworthy.  I can't speak for him.  But the conflict of interest is in black-and-white.

Another thing, please don't take this as a personal attack, but given quickseller's buying and selling and farming of accounts, how do we know you're not just a sockpuppet trying to deflect valid criticisms of him?

I don't know the situation with TF. Like I said, I would have to take a closer look at what happened. A cursory look at the thread seemed to show that you admitted to using bots which is why I said you defrauded. Again, I don't know the full details which is why I haven't left any trust.

I didn't look at any trolling threads. If there is serious trolling and harrassment, the proof should be submitted to whoever has Quickseller on their trust list.

I'm a sock puppet? I've been consistently active and posting for close to two years. Don't get all conspiracy theory now.

You should always say the truth and be 'neutral'.





If I can say my personal opinion about this fact (not only about Quickseller) but this is the wrong thing here, because nobody can determine if he is 'talking' with 1 user = 1 person or 1 person = 3-4 alternative accounts. So it is very difficult to 'catch' some valid thoughts about 'a problem' here in the forum.

I tried to be neutral but I can't. Even if I support person(s), I don't tell lies. I tell truth or what I understood. If I agree/support a person in a case, I may not agree/support him/her in all. What I said above about QS is what I know.

In this case maybe it is better to not post, or am I wrong?



It seems that it is not the case, or maybe an user if he will read what you wrote ... he will understand for sure another thing.

---

Thanks for admitting this.
Well, as was stated in that very thread, and elsewhere, what I admitted to was working on a question answering by with TF's approval and help.  I did not admit to defrauding or any other thing along those lines.   Talking to TF about it was crazy, he merely said "you stole, give X back" and the X varied each time he said it so it was basically blackmail as far as I could tell.  There were global moderators in that thread who did not leave me negative trust either and it's clear that this was because they saw that it was a case of he-said-she-said and everyone moved on.  Then, later, history revealed TF as one of the most untrustworthy people ever to appear on this forum and I've basically had several years of chatting and talking and 0 problems with anyone until QS comes along with a vengance mission.

The links are there in the thread where I call out QS and his alt for doing this.  He mainly trolled with an alt account "ACCTSeller" and at the time he played coy about whether this was an alt.  But later he admitted in another context that that was his alt and the trolling is quite clear.  The evidence has been submitted to BadBear but he is only back as of today and I don't expect that looking into this is at the top of his priority list.  Nevertheless, I'm confident he'll sort it out soon.


I hope you dont take that too seriously.  But given that QS deals in farmed and bought and sold accounts and he loves to play games with them, it's never really clear whether you're talking to one of his sock-puppets.  I'm not saying this is your case, I just think it's important to talk about the principle of it.

I'm really sorry but I also want to have a few words in this debate. I told my personal behalf, according to my thoughts without any prejudice to the

parties concerned. I think this is a delicate matter.

I just wanted to ask you that, if you are Quickseller do you like him? I think yes. I'm not referring to just anyone, but virtually all of the members here,

in one way or another will do so. Then, why we must continue to argue about it?

Assumptions as he leave positive trust for himself (I assume) is also nothing excessive unless he abused it so that leave feedback for others - who do

not deserve it. Meanwhile, practice has proved that Quickseller deserved to it. Trust +5 or Trust +6 is not an issue.

The problem is that he can be trusted or not will be made by the person concerned to comment ....

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1048706.0

Consolidated list of the lies

Actually this is just Blazedout419 trying to rickroll us.   I'd have expected something a little more serious from him.  Blazedout419, you probably will think this stuff is less of a joke when Quickseller eventually goes after you and tries to ruin your reputation without cause.

blazed has a spotless record both here and in IRC. I have traded with him a number of times and have trusted him with a good amount of money.

Actually now that I think about it, he is one of two people that I had sent first when trading with, everyone else I made them either send first or use escrow.

I would personally be surprised if blazed was ever involved in a scam.

That's fine.  You vouch for him.  I've got no problem with blazedout either.  I did business with him in the past as an advertizer for SliverWallets (unless I'm confusing him with someone else).  The issue here is him making light of the trouble you're making for other people.

The only people I am making trouble for is scammers. I didn't actually leave myself positive trust, not only that but doing so wouldn't even make any sense because the account that left me positive trust is likely on no ones trust list.

His spreadsheet does sum up everything very well

I was just messing around...everyone on the forums is so serious lately. I was hoping it might make someone crack a smile. Sorry if you though I was directing it at you though.

I can't speak for everyone else but I know that I've never scammed anyone and you have stirred up a shitload of annoyance and trouble for me which was only motivated by the fact that you didn't like that I called you out for your quick temper and hotheadedness.  You then turned that hotheadedness against me and trolled me with an alt account and then used the lies of a known a scammer as "evidence" that I did something wrong over 2 years ago.  You then left trust spam on my account neg-repping me multiple times from multiple accounts.  What you did to me would be absolutely laughably sad if it weren't that you're on default trust (for the moment).

So, what you just said above is patently untrue.  I'm not worried though, your reign of terror won't last for very much longer.


It's all good, of course it's good to have a laugh.  But I know that I'm not finding QS's smear-campaign against my reputation very funny.  I suppose that others who have suffered similar issues would feel the same.

I really think he will remove (or maybe better change to neutral) the negative trust, but I do not know what you should do. Perhaps you have to repay $username aka TF.

Not an option.  I never took any money from TF so there's nothing to repay.  He essentially tried to blackmail me and say that I owed him "everything I had ever withdrawn" from his service.  If I had been able to have some kind of reasonable conversation with TF back then then we might have been able to figure out just where the misunderstanding was.  However, he was not interested in talking, he was interested in having his demands met and I wasn't going to submit to blackmail.  History revealed him as a scammer and has revealed me as a regular guy who doesn't make trouble.  Now, ask yourself this, why I am I going to pay a blackmailing scammer some arbitrary amount of money in order to have a troll on default trust say that "I'm okay in his book"?  That would be an absolute disregard of principle and I'd rather leave the false accusation from Quickseller up there alongside TF's false accusation than pay them money to take them down.  Given the way he treats people, I'm pretty confident that we'll be finding Quickseller on the trashbin of history alongside TF in the future.  For people like me who aren't doing anything wrong, it's best just to let the theives and criminals and hotheads burn themselves out.