Bitcoin Forum

CanaryInTheMine refuses to pay despite him being the winning bidder of my auction:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=235864.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=235864.0)

Requesting a scammer tag for CanaryInTheMine.

Thanks.

Did you send him the codes?

Good god man, just use escrow..it's really not that big of a deal if you're legit.

He shouldn't have to send the codes first. Canary should be paying vortex first and then the codes would be sent. That's how it should work. The offer of escrow has been noted, so if there's problems why is it not being used? Not honouring your side of the deal is just stupid.

Scammer? No.
Making a mountain of a molehill and not going through a deal just because there's a small disagreement on who goes first? Yes.

Both of you are just as bad as each other, vortex for creating a scam report when there was no actual scam and for something that could have been dealt with over PM and a mutual agreement on escrow and Canary for not honouring his side of the deal just because he doesn't want to go first. Use escrow if you don't want to go first, it's not hard.

Sorry, but check this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=238474.0

You will learn that in these forums auctions are nothing but "a device to assist in price negotiation" (literal quote from the admin). You can aritificially raise the price with alt-accounts (aka "shill bidding"), not honor bids, not honor winners, etc. etc. etc. and you will never get a scammer tag.

The only way for CanaryInTheMine to get a scammer tag would be him to have signed a binding GPG contract with you, stating that he would have honored his bids if he won.

Sounds like a joke? Unfortunately I agree but these are not my rules, but the official forum's policy regarding auctions and scammer tags.

just send canary the damn codes and get paid. these stupid bfl discount codes are near worthless now (due to the thousands being dumped, and the fact that there are no chips to sell at the moment, and the fact you have to order 100 chips min when they are available).

You delaying your end of the deal just causes their price to drop even more.

   +101  It's mornin'!  Mmmm, smell that coffee.

+1

This is a good summary of theymos' opinion on the matter. Probably just need a written agreement though, not GPG. Unless I missed something :P

It was a general question, I wasn't implying either way. I presumed that, given this thread was in the 'Scam Accusations' category, someone had made a move and the other party failed to reciprocate. Turns out it's just the OP not getting their way and complaining about it..

CanaryInTheMine still has not paid.

Here is the PM conversation. After that he posted in the thread (to become even insulting) where I then replied.


So I signed a message for him with my address, I offered that he can use escrow, but still he refuses to pay and comes up with insulting bs.

I don't think this is the way anybody should behave here.

And regarding any written agreement: To bid in an auction is a written agreement itself. Plus CanaryInTheMine even endorsed that by posting:


And that he then later publicly said he would not honour his bid, I better leave uncommented...

If he doesn't trust me - fine. That's what escrow is for. But why would I send first, especially after all this dickhead behaviour?!

Lying is yet another "device to assist in price negotiation," i don't see any problems.

"To bid in an auction is an agreement by itself"?

Maybe in the outside world, but in this forum an auction is only a "device to assist in price negotiations". Everything is allowed unless there is a signed agreement between you two, for example where you state that canary would have honoured his winning bids.

No scammer tag will be applied.

Please read the thread I linked in my first post.

Yeah, forget about the scammer tag.

It just cannot be that somebody gets away with this. And there is no other place (I know of) in this forum to make such matters public.

Well，I guess if people actually took the time to learn the rules, these things would not have happened, but seriously, based on Canary's previous ventures, I seriously doubt he would scam 0.5 BTCs (or whatever was the amount here), I sent him over 10 BTC without escrow... just my observation.

I understand. It feels bad to lose time in joke auctions. In my opinion and due to the recent events, this is definitely not a good place to run or participate in auctions. Shill bidding is officially tolerated, bids are not binding... Auctions subofurums are just scammer paradise and a very ugly way to lose time.

Auctions here are a bit different than eBay or at an auction house; They're non-binding. Even normal auctions you have the ability to turn down the purchase, though it's heavily frowned upon.

Point is, you seemed to have missed this gem:

You two need to work something out. There is absolutely nothing that will be done otherwise.


EDIT: Ah, Rampion seems to be on top of it this morning with his other posts :D

Yes, I have also not expected such behaviour (nor have I ever had to experience something similar before in this forum)...

EDIT: And work what out exactly? The case is clear, and so is the solution..!

Curiously, the solution that's clear to theymos is clearly different from yours.

There was a written agreement (evidenced by the thread).

Forum policy has nothing to do with anything (especially now that scammer tags don't exist).

Forum policy does not dictate that there was no agreement; rather it says the mods won't act to enforce the agreement.

There was an agreement and the winner refuses to pay. There are (much!) worse examples but I say leave neg rep if you feel strongly enough. That's what it's there for.

I'm not entirely sure you know how written agreements work...

Find, on the main auction page (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=235864.msg2492104#msg2492104), where a binding agreement is created prior to bidding. This sort of agreement would state how both parties should proceed once bidding has ended and a winner has been chosen.

The agreement is for the sale and purchase of codes. Offer, acceptance and consideration evidenced by the thread as a whole.

I understand your point - that they did not set out in writing the order of payment and delivery - but such terms are surely implied being the norm for auctions (i.e. pay first (or into escrow), get product).

This is pretty much Rampion's point:  No terms are implicit, no precedence or common knowledge can be applied, theymos was *explicit* on that.

EXACTLY.

runam0k: Read the link I posted in my first post in this thread for more info (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=238474.0)

EDIT: I did the job for you and looked for the relevant quotes, please see below (I bolded the parts that seem relevant for the current discussion)

This thread serves it's purpose.

But just don't expect any tagging to be done because of it.

Theymos just expects you to use the trust system now.

I thought I read scammer tags are now a thing of the past - are the mods still giving out scammer tags at all? If yes, there's a heck of a backlog. :D

crumbs, Rampion - thanks. I understand the auction scammer tag policy (no scammer tag unless there's an actual scam i.e. fraud) and that the mods won't otherwise enforce auctions (seems daft that winning bids aren't binding, but whatyagonnado?).

That wouldn't stop me posting neg rep for blatant auction time-wasting. We frown upon it for a reason: it's dickish and the perp should be called out. (General statements - this is a weak case.)

If the mods feel strongly enough, they can always remove it. ;D

Those codes are worthless and you are a less trusted member. Why should be send you BTC first? Lots of QQ for 0.5 BTC you would have gotten if you hadn't been a child about sending the codes.