Bitcoin Forum

As am wearing the signature of BestChange since the biggenning of its campaign, i have been always inteested about the open accusations against the reputation of the project representer who is also managing the campaign.
I posted three days ago after the update about the case been resolved with the accused exchange and many DT users reviewed their feedback, but some others still not. I post this to bump the topic and get more opinions about the actual situation of BestChange .

..
Am not affiliated with bestchange project. This is not the reputation thread of bestchange. I aim to start the discussion again about it as no one seems to care about the red marks in its reputation even the manager himself who is, until now, mainly focusing on doing his job in a professional way.
I am wearing their signature since three weeks and still see how difficult to rate bestchange from different opinions (negative to neutreul) made for almost the same reason. Does there a valid reason for the actual negative trusts and flag?
I will close the topic once get a clear response .

OP, I did not see that you are leaving feedback and support/oppose the flag.

You wearing Bestchange signature, so you are affiliated with them. Like me of course, and our opinions can always be considered as a paid shill.

Also as examplens said, you are affiliated with them because you are wearing their signature. You are paid to make this post as well. They may not have asked you to post this, but you have and are being paid by doing it.

And then came the Sergey incident where his money was held by changehero, again they were on spotlight even more that the actual culprits who were holding Sergey's money. I think some people where trying to prove a point of their earlier negative feedback about not using escrow, something like 'you see? i told you so'

BEWARE - this user has no history on the forum but created a signature bounty without escrow

Furthermore, this user watched from the sidelines WITHOUT entering the conversation when users discussed bestchange. Instead this user sent PMs to its supporters rather than have an open transparent debate therefore not definitely not trustworthy.

promoting fraudulent exchange sites, see References

The issue has been resolve and as @best_change explanation it's just frozen account and the money has been claimed by the owner. So I really believe that my fellow DT should remove or at least make their feedback a neutral one, and the flag that has been created should be deleted or at least should be oppose by other DT.

I haven't read everything, but if this is true, I'd say the negative feedback should be removed. This might also help motivate others to do the right thing in a similar situation in the future.
If it becomes clear negative feedback is there to stay even after fixing the accusations, users might be less willing to do the right thing.

I haven't read everything, but if this is true, I'd say the negative feedback should be removed. This might also help motivate others to do the right thing in a similar situation in the future.
If it becomes clear negative feedback is there to stay even after fixing the accusations, users might be less willing to do the right thing.

Official statement from ChangeHero regarding the case with Sergey M.

On 27/10/2019 supposedly Sergey M. (hereinafter - “the User”) has made two transactions with the web interface of the ChangeHero service (hereinafter - “the Service”).

The first transaction was made at 15:15:12 on 27/10/2019. Exchanged 50 USDT20 to XMR. Finished at 15:52:43.
The second transaction was made at 17:11:44 on 27/10/2019. Exchanged 21,010 USDT20 to XMR. The transaction was automatically put on hold due to AML-system being triggered.

Sequence of interactions with the user
 
The interaction with the User was happening as follows:
On 27/10/2019 at 20:28 the User contacted the Service’s support team through the chat asking for a refund of his assets because he refused to pass the user verification procedure known as KYC (“Know Your Customer”). At 21:04 he was provided with the support team’s email address, where further communication was occuring;
On 29/10/2019 at 15:55, after consulting with legal experts, the Service has decided to continue verification of the User until the circumstances are completely clarified;
On 01/11/2019 at 14:53 after the User’s inquiry, the Service affirmed the refund is possible only after completing the KYC procedure;
On 09/11/2019, as a reply to the previous letter, the User sent an email with his ID, proof of source of part of his funds and screenshots of his exchange account attached to it;
To confirm the User’s identity, on 21/12/2019 a Skype call was made after being repeatedly postponed, through the User’s fault as well.

During the Skype call, the User was asked a few standard questions, which, in our opinion, could serve as a proof of ownership over the funds:
Which cryptocurrency wallet was used by the User to send the funds to the Service;
Which cryptocurrency wallet was used by the User to receive the funds exchanged by the Service;
Why did the User exchanged his funds not directly on the exchange (at the time of transactions, the rates on the exchange were more favorable);
For what activities does the User utilize his exchange account, from which the funds were sent to the Service.
The User was not able to provide an answer to any of these questions and disconnected from the call, claiming he would call back in 15-20 minutes.

To get more information on the case, during a few days from 21/12/2019 until 17/01/2020 the Service sent inquiries to the exchange from which the funds were sent. The information received from the exchange representatives can be summarized as follows:
The funds were indeed sent from their exchange account;
The account shows the signs of “allegedly suspicious activity”;
There were no official inquiries from law enforcement regarding this account.

Closing the case

According to the Terms of Use, on 31/01/2020 at 13:39:43 the Service has made a refund to the outgoing Address 0x975f422840ed3729a5b95a60e454e0826b719f4a, Hash: 0x207cc2a75781aecc9b08d6f7e7bfeadce53ff85c7ee509cc79ea8da1b8477d9f. The address will be blacklisted by the Service, and the User or any further operations connected with this address will be blocked.

Despite the unjustified accusations, all the time since the start of the incident, the User’s funds were on hold on the Service’s payin address, were not sent or used in any other transactions.

Concluding the case

ChangeHero is a non-custodial exchange solution. It does not withhold its users’ assets and balances. It does not require obligatory sign-up.

The Service’s team adheres to the policy of opposing illegal activities, such as fraud, money laundering, as well as suspicious operations and transactions. The Service’s policy will not be changed despite the attempts to influence it through public activities, private e-mail and messaging, Service’s partners etc.

The Service is going to review the communication flow with its customers who refuse to undergo KYC and to resolve similar future cases within 24 hours.

The Service is going to review its Terms of Use to make the conditions of using the Service more clear and understandable to the Users.

The team is sincerely sorry that some of these unjustified accusations and reputation damage were dealt to the BestChange and Indacoin services that have no connection to the transactions in question. We express our gratitude to BestChange and Indacoin for adhering to their Terms of Use and not pressuring ChangeHero to refund the assets in question.

There is a flag created on BestChange profile supported by some respected members.  

What this can be other than a personal issue?

None of these people have responded yet (imhoneer, YOSHIE, TMAN, Hueristic, JollyGood.)

They don't deserve to be in DT if they are not making judgment for the benefit of the majority.

Expecting instant response isn't always fair.

Its your cheap thinking and its better not to apply on others. They are holding their positions with the acceptation of their judgement and without you majority number of people have trust on their judgement.

The thread was created 4 days ago, am I expecting instant reply?

Trust rating are important to a business since they like to have a good reputation in the forum they are using to promote their business, do you think they will continue promoting in this forum if the community is not fair? think about that for a second.

The system is for handling trade risk, not for flagging people for good/bad posts/personalities/ideas.

- Leave positive ratings if you actively think that trading with this person is safer than with a random person.
 - Leave negative ratings if you actively think that trading with the person is less safe than with a random person.
 - Unstable behavior could very occasionally be an acceptable reason for leaving negative trust, but if it looks like you're leaving negative trust due to personal disagreements, then that's inappropriate. Ratings are not for popularity contests, virtue signalling, punishing people for your idea of wrongthink, etc.

- Use flags only for very serious and clear-cut things. They're an expression of ostracizing someone from the community due to serious, provable misconduct or really obvious red flags.

Expecting instant response isn't always fair. Its good to see that bestchange have solved their issue and these DT members negative tag plays the main role here. They can remove their negative trust anytime when they feel it necessary but if they didn't do that than maybe bestchange won't feel it necessary to solve the issue within short time. So i am gonna give a big amount of credit to all these DT members who took their action for a better solution.

They were literally silent during all these 90 days, edited their own terms of usage and began to pretend that user was a kind of empty place for them. Such kind of behaviour is absolutely unacceptable.

I would keep updating this thread until to get an answer. It's hard to believe that none of users who left the feedback had noticed this thread or didn't check the updates in reference threads he uses for his {red} feedbacks .

I mentioned in op that i will close the topic once get a valid reason for the [permanent] red tags in bestchange profile. Honestly, i am really confused about the relyability of the trust system.
Any red tag should be justifief by a valid reference link. This is what i have noticed but some exceptions are really hard to understand.

Maybe you need to PM these users who haven't removed their negative feedbacks from Bestchange profile. As I understand, accusation against Bestchange already been resolved some time ago, so this situation looks strange. I doubt that they haven't noticed that or this thread. Maybe they think that Bestchange still can't be trusted after all...

Good Day Sir,
Am contacting you to invite you review your feedback on Bedtchange profile as the cases that were subjects of the tags was already solved.

Please check this thread to resume why am privately contacting you : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5224665.0

Thanks

I left neutral feedback on Bestchange profile, and since then I received several PM requests to remove my feedback.
One more for my ignore list.

I would keep updating this thread until to get an answer. It's hard to believe that none of users who left the feedback had noticed this thread or didn't check the updates in reference threads he uses for his {red} feedbacks .

I mentioned in op that i will close the topic once get a valid reason for the [permanent] red tags in bestchange profile. Honestly, i am really confused about the relyability of the trust system.
Any red tag should be justifief by a valid reference link. This is what i have noticed but some exceptions are really hard to understand.

I really don't care anymore about the BestChange campaign whether you want to be paid or not.

So right now, if I associate it with the red trust in (BestChange) (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1073450), I can't make a decision because there are 11 DT members currently in it.

I respect their decision in this matter.

For now I am just waiting for the results of the 11 DT, against (BestChange). In making a decision to delete or not. red trust

So now I have explained the point of the problem now.

My negative feedback for BestChange is going to stay because it is very relevant.

If you read thought the tag properly you would know I did not leave negative trust because of the $21,000 scam, I left my negative feedback long before that accusation and my reasons are stated within the trust section: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=1073450

When BestChange send copy and pasted PMs to those that left negative trust asking it to be removed otherwise there was a threat made against us. I ignored that pathetic PM just like the other users that received it. In your case I am posting a reply here, please do not send me any more PMs - thank you.

Now you have to look at this one post, from the beginning I have said about BestChange.


The red paint I gave for BestChange based on: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5219339.msg53670911#msg53670911

So, please don't send me PM again, I'm afraid I won't have time to read, thank you.

@JollyGood I really respect what are you doing on this forum, in most cases I agree with you but I'm not sure about this case.

1. Trust ratings of Changehero.io, the ones who actually withheld the funds

Exchanger reliability

You can trust all exchangers listed here. The BestChange.com monitoring service contains only reliable exchangers verified by our administrator. All of them have high business levels, good reserves and enough experience in the exchange business. Before you start exchanging money, we recommend that you pay attention to the WebMoney BL and Perfect Money TS of the exchanger and the number of comments (you can see it in the information tip).

promoting fraudulent exchange sites, see References

Unfortunately, it’s also possible to understand the exchanger, because if the funds were indeed obtained illegitimately, they will be held responsible for helping fraudsters/drug dealers or the like.

On the other hand, the exchanger has not yet provided any serious evidence for their suspicions, just their subjective opinion.

~snip~

BEWARE - this user has no history on the forum but created a signature bounty without escrow

Furthermore, this user watched from the sidelines WITHOUT entering the conversation when users discussed bestchange. Instead this user sent PMs to its supporters rather than have an open transparent debate therefore not definitely not trustworthy.

Negative - You think that trading with this person is high-risk.

~snip~

Added: I haven't fully caught up in this thread yet.

Added: changing to neutral until I can finish reading and remembering what the hell was going on here. Getting a headache from trying to translate shit.

On JollyGood feedback

Shouldn't this one be remove already, BC has been consistently paying the campaign without delay.


Hilarious, home come this is a scammy behavior? you aren't using the trust system properly JollyGood

read again.

Just because they are not actively replying every post, you think they are scam, you can't make this reasoning in the court.
Please stop ruining people's business, I admire you but this one is too much which is not right anymore.