Bitcoin Forum

Please remove the negative trust that you placed on RedSn0w or at least make it neutral. He is to be trusted but just not for escrow, so put it as neutral or we will have problems.

The negative trust you gave to Redsn0w is unecessary as he did nothing to make him untrustworthy. Please remove it or at least make it neutral trust or I'll be forced to give you negative trust.

Alright I'll just shoot you a PM, reply when you can.
Bear in mind I messaged shorena as well, awaiting response. bitcoininformation recommended to get your opinion.

Myself and a few others are consdering opening a Ponzi Game. DO NOT panic, this isn't a ponzi SCHEME or a ponzi SCAM. Ponzi schemes/scams are sites that promise you guaranteed investments using something like trading but really payout with other investor money. A ponzi GAME is a site where it blatantly states it uses the Ponzi structure and that you may lose your coins. Technically, it is legal and considered a gambling game just like a dice site.

The reason why I'm PM'ing people is due to the high rise of Ponzi sites by Newbie members. Scams being a massive rise indeed.

I am not saying I am going to do this unless members like yourself or shorena approve, but what would your opinion be on a small maximum (like .5btc), automatic and instant ponzi game ran by a member like myself and another two semi-trusted members on this forum? Myself and the other two really want to run an official and trustworthy game on this forum but since so many new sites get their trust ratings ruined from running them it has prevented us greatly.  Bear in mind .5BTC maximum with 125% return (24hr rounds) would mean maximum .65BTC (including  5% fees) in the wallet at a time.

It would work so that we can't cheat out users (everything on blockchain and only one transaction at a time, everything is instant even if there aren't any confirmations) and of course we'd be able to give everyone realtime support. Fee addresses also listed publicly.

The three of us have positive trust here and one is in default trust. I can provide the identities if you want them. I beg you hear us out and give your opinion before you jump to the negative trust button.

One issue risen by Mitchełł (bitcoininformation) was this:

Personally, I wouldn't do it for profit but rather to keep the program activity up.
What I would do to avoid this flaw is continue reinvesting a portion of my profit (like 20%) until the program dies that way the ending loss doesn't hit members as hard as what it would if i didn't invest.
I wouldn't do it for my own personal gain but yes he is right it is a flaw that is un-preventable even if we wanted to prevent it. There is always that possibility. That's where the trust comes in I suppose.

I want to run it by members like yourself before we do anything hence I am PM'ing people privately. I don't want to piss people off I just want to end the scams and have a place where people can play the ponzi game if they choose to play it, and do it safely.

Just let me know your opinion (via PM, not in the thread) I'm just asking around because I think it would be a good idea to get a site like this going by a semi-trusted/established member rather than a newbie.

Thanks for reading, very much looking forward to your response!

Best regards.

I sent you negative trust because I view your trust that you are currently sending is false and misguided.

Just in nextponzi, it seemed a bit legit... but now it's having some bugs and problems so Idk.

I sent you negative trust because I view your trust that you are currently sending is false and misguided. Also I've been on the trust list for a long ass time son. I was a supporter of bitcoin stocks for the time that they were paying out, I kept reinvesting and they kept paying. But I did not condone their activities when they ran.

I don't believe that gambling sites deserve negative trust, I made a thread for that and we are currently disputing it. The odds are against you on it.

Does this also mean that me and redsn0w are also in cahoots? It seems like we are just protecting members of the community rather than "teammates". Plus, even if I was working with him as a friend what'd be wrong with that?

Please tell me how this whole get Michael off the trust list works,
           Love, Michael.

0 reason to do so. Redsn0w screwed up an escrow job and therefore has been marked as untrustworthy. Leaving negative trust in retaliation to negative trust placed on redsn0w by Quickseller is child's play and immature as hell.

Like I have said many times, anyone who gives negative trust for "trust abuse" is not someone whose trust reports I value. That is exactly what you have now done twice.
If you have successfully traded with them then you should give them positive trust. People have the option of looking at what I posted and deciding if they should trust them or not.
You were trying to censor my honest feedback. The fact that I tied you to someone who sells hacked accounts leads me to believe that you will likely attempt to hack Redsn0w's account sometime in the future and want his reputation as pristine as possible for when you do so.
Will do thanks

Where the hell do you get off saying that I hack accounts now, and why would I hack redsnows account... I admire him as an escrow even though he messed up a little.

Both you and Spodermen were actively pushing/promoting bitcoin-stocks. This makes me believe that you are either one and the same or are partners with him. It is confirmed that Spodermen was selling hacked accounts.

I do not know for sure that was your rationale behind blackmailing me into removing my trust left for Redsn0w, however I am fairly confident that it was more then "he is your friend"

michaeladair has supported the site on several occasions. 

yes, he threatened me he has many friends on this forum who are ready to leave me negative trust if i keep posting about his ponzi.
that wont stop me tho :)

Above are quotes that I quoted in my scam accusation against bitcoin-stocks which you were supporting. Let me know if you want to dispute either of them.

One other things: I was notified via PM that you were blackmailing rammy2k2 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=94485) to remove his negative trust on bitcoin-stocks.
PM received:

Negative trust removed, not because of this thread but due to a change in opinion of mine: reference (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=927206.msg10181807#msg10181807)

I still stand by my request to have him removed from BadBears list. This is the 2nd time you have removed negative trust after your blackmail has not worked. I am not sure what happened with rammy2k2, however this clearly shows that he is willing to use his position to get people to say (or not say) certain things

Looks like you succeeded in using default trust in order to coerce someone else into removing their negative feedback against you. Good for you. That makes you and CanaryInTheMine look like upstanding people who definitely deserve to be in the default trust network, and certainly doesn't lend any credence to other claims that may or may not be true /s. 

 :-[

It means it would be quite hypocritical for BadBear not to remove you.

 :-[

Well technically speaking he did not succeed, and I used my words/logic to get him to remove his trust on me.

Hopefully he will see that this is not the first time he has done this and will remove him.

I clearly stated that the removal of the negative trust was due to my opinion changing and of no help from you. I do not believe in your logic still.

"Negative trust removed, not because of this thread but due to a change in opinion of mine: reference"

I do not believe in your logic still. Anyways, its not blackmail just merely the fact that I don't trust his judgment. Hence the negative trust...

"Negative trust removed, not because of this thread but due to a change in opinion of mine: reference"

I don't know if this is the right place , but a few days ago ( the 14th Jan)  I've received a request through the email address to change the password . This is the IP address :


I don't know if someone here is involved , but I would like to ask BadBear if he can check the ip.


Thanks.

You both shouldn't be on the default trust list. The fact either of you are is truly sad for this forum. Members here for 6 months essentially and given the power to give green or red to any account. Not right.

Hell, Quickseller even sells accounts, he could simply build his shill accounts to give them green. One of the biggest problems with this forum right now is the sheer amount of spam accounts and accounts simply used for signature campaigns. The spam is out of control, YET one of the main sellers who supplies the accounts which spams and ultimately is part of the problem is on the default trust list. He even markets that spamming can earn you money. Yet BadBear is constantly banning spammers because its a problem. Now tell me why an account less then a year old, supplying a strong part of this forum's biggest downfall right now is on the default list? Oh the irony.

Probably one of the biggest BS things on this forum right now.

Relevant PM's:

haha ok Mr. Police man. So what kind of problems will you guys be having? Trust war?

Quite a funny threat.

Oh yeah, most definitely. In fact promote him to admin. Isn't it obvious?

And while we're on the same topic, you better feed me with some positive trust. Or else... you're gonna get it...

Point made. Thanks :)

Point made. Thanks :)

Please delete this post and dont threadjack I'd like badbear to see my latest post.

Please delete this post and dont threadjack I'd like badbear to see my latest post.

Just PM him if you want him to remove you from his trust list, I doubt he will deny your request.

Okay now I'm pissed... Fucking pissed as hell in fact.
I am not alts of any of those damn accounts Quickseller and I don't even know how to fucking hack. Take me off of the default trust list idc, but don't give me negative trust. I will consent to an IP check, hell I'll give you my fucking address.

BADBEAR, please contact me. I'd like you to IP check my account and all in question accounts that they are accusing that I own.

EDIT: I request myself off default trust.

I want him to see that whole post because quickseller is claiming that I am an alt of those accounts and I'm not (check my trust for reference)

O shit, he negged you? Want me to try and get him to remove it?

His feedback says you're either an alt or an associate of Plutonium & co. I'm not sure if you're the same person, there isn't conclusive evidence here, but there is good reason to think you were involved in his operations. You made many posts promoting his scheme and left him positive feedback. You also offered to get Plutonium to remove the negative trust he left me, which I'm not sure why you would have done if you didn't have some sort of relationship with him:

You should have known you were staking your reputation by endorsing his scam.

Anyone on the default could give their alts positive trust, but if they did and it was found out (which wouldn't be that difficult especially in Quickseller's case) they likely would be removed. It also doesn't matter how long someone has been here but how trustworthy they are with their ratings. If it's abused by them they'll be removed so it's in their interests to keep their feedbacks accurate.

I messaged him and convinced him because it wasnt right then he gave you negative trust. Also, I'm not involved or an alt of the bitcoinstocks ponzi, I only supported it because it kept paying me out. I didn't support it when it stopped sending.

Please post that PM here and report it to an admin so they can verify its legitimacy. I believe Quickseller would agree with me that this would be sufficient proof that you are not his alt.

Damn right.

Also "I support ponzi schemes until they stop paying" is an absurd statement any way you slice it. If this guy isn't involved in at least one of them I will eat my hat

I deleted it a long while ago because I didn't want everyone to think that just because I persuaded him that I was in cahoots with him.

It can be verified by BadBear if you want. Send him a PM.

It was an hyip. I don't support ponzi schemes, just the games based on ponzis...

I was tempted to turn this into a meme and be done with it. But I'd like you to explain this semantic shuffle. Is ponzi game like assault dance?

Ponzi games involve people gambling on the chance that someone else will send money after them. I support the ones that clearly state the consequences and the risks involved in sending money.

*Insert dumb meme here*

Ponzi Schemes don't fucking say that they are Ponzis... Go to this thread here and try and prove the people that believe me wrong. These games show that there is a risk in what they are doing unlike Ponzi Schemes.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=927206.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=927206.0)

Is this the blackmail thread then?

It's thread in which I and many others prove that negative trust is not necessary for Ponzi Game sites.

And I already said that I want to be off the Default Trust list.

I read the thread. A ponzi is a game when it's called a ponzi. Very clever. We should move all the threads to the beginners and help section. Newbies love 'games' ::)

Please post that PM here and report it to an admin so they can verify its legitimacy. I believe Quickseller would agree with me that this would be sufficient proof that you are not his alt.

I'm out of the default trust now, I'm gonna work with badbear and sort out the claim made against me that i use all those alts. (See my trust for the list that quickseller made)

In general, I'm not going to get involved with these sorts of accusations of alts/sockpuppets. If I'm not going to confirm such accusations, then it's a bad idea to deny them as well. In cases where I do not deny them, people would see it as effectively a confirmation, when there are other reasons I may not want to confirm such allegations. You'll also end up in situations where people will just start throwing a bunch of accusations out to see what sticks.  

Besides, I can't state with any authority whether x is not y, only thing I can do is state whether there is evidence they are (and see previous statement for why I won't disclose that). Lack of such evidence doesn't mean they aren't.

There are lots of bad reasons to start doing this sort of thing, in the end I've decided it's best to just stay out of it, as an admin anyway. This doesn't mean I won't take actions regarding my personal trust list.

Is it not possible to check the ips that logged into to the alts and my account?

I know you are against doing it as an admin, but I don't want to be marked with this false negative trust...

Like I said above even if it were shown that you are not an alt of the people claimed to be you I would only edit the negative to reflect you being an extortionist, which I think is the worse of the claims. Like MadZ said, my feedback says you are either an alt or an associate (e.g. in the same scamming ring) of them. Like I said, I would accept you publishing a single PM to/from Plutonium as proof you are not one and the same.

I really don't care if I am labeled as an EXTORTIONIST, that is basically what I did to you and I realize that. I just do not want to be falsely accused of something that I did not do.

If I had to choose between being called a thief or an extortionist then I would pick thief any day (I am not either of them).

I have edited my feedback to show you as only being an extortionist, although I cannot guarantee that someone else will look at the same evidence I looked at and make the same conclusion (and potentially leave similar feedback that I originally left you).

Like I said above he is clearly trying to silence the opinions that he does not agree with which is not something that the trust system was designed to do.

Yet when Vod did the same to iCEBREAKER, you defended Vod. Bit hypocritical, isn't it?

Anyway, it's interesting to see BadBear adding you, an account seller, and Michaeladair, a ponzi supporter/operator, into his trust list. More interesting than watching you and Michael flinging handbags at one another.

In my honest opinion...Quickseller should drop the negative trust.

Just my BTC0.02.

I'd agree with you if he just made it into neutral, but I don't think it should disappear.

That's what I meant. But a negative isn't really warranted.

Okay, well thanks for your support... Even though I don't believe he'll change it.

"You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer."
I didn't scam, so I guess that's a point that can be made.

"Comments. Your rating will not affect this person's trust score."
I guess the trust he sent is more like a neutral comment...

I am Spodermen, thought I should let you know, and I want to express I didn't sell the account. I was reselling the default trust account you were selling.

Stop spreading bullshit because your so called proof meant jack shit.

You fail as "scam detector" with false evidence, i'm going to be working my ass off to prove all of your cases wrong, and when I do i'll be putting you to shame in front of this whole section.

I am glad that I am able to piss off scammers. I am not sure why you aren't posting from your Spodermen account, however you admitting to be one and the same only confirms that you are either the same as michaledair or are partners with him as you both were pushing bitcoin-stocks very hard.

If I was the same or even in cahoots with this guy then don't you think I would have gotten him to help me a lot earlier?

That person is a long time known scammer and a lier. There is noting he could say that could help you.

I don't care if he can help me, I'm just saying that I'm not in cahoots with any of those scammers.

His MO is even the same as yours. If you look at the feedback dooglas gave him you will see that he blackmailed dooglas into removing his negative trust or he would leave a negative trust on dooglas saying 1000 BTC was risked.

I never gave you negative trust with any value to it + Exortionist does not mean i scam. So that shouldnt be red trust (Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer.).

Also, there is no hard evidence that I am aligned with those accounts or the bitcoinstocks scam.

(n)the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.

It's possible, its difficult to say whether he's simply an idiot or apart of that ring of ponzis though....

In trying to extort me into not giving negative trust to the ponzi scams you were trying to scam. When I leave negative trust on someone's account it takes away value from their account. By trying to get me to stop giving negative trust to those scams you were essentially trying to get me to give value to the accounts that they do not deserve. This is important because you were planning on starting a ponzi scam under your own name and did not want to get negative trust when you started it (not to mention the fact that you are likely behind some of the other ponzi scams out there that created new accounts based on how hard you were pushing several of them). This is probably why both you are moreia have been taking out so many loans - because you want to build up trust so people will quickly "invest" in your scam.

There is evidence that you are partners with the other accounts and the bitcoin-stocks scam as outlined above. Like I said you were pushing the bitcoin-stocks scam very hard, and were pushing another one very hard (I forget which one) that also ran away with investor money. A very highly trusted and respected member of the community even said


The reason I put the trust back on to reflect my belief that you are associated with bitcoin-stocks et el is because you opened a new loan request ~18 hours after you canceled your previous one when I stated I still strongly believe you are associated with them. You also happened to cancel your loan request minutes after you said it was still needed. This makes me believe that you were trying to hide the fact that I believe you are part of the ring of scammers

I did not know that they were going to scam in the end, I didn't see anything wrong in what they were doing at the time because they were obviously paying back. I too got hurt in there scam and won't be making all my money back. You have no hard evidence that I was a part of any of those scams because, it'd be impossible to gather. Being that I was never a part of them...

I started a new loan request because I plan on buying an alt coin that I noticed will go up soon, I do this activity a lot. I always have money in my pocket in order to pay back the loan if things go wrong.

Hate losing your money to Alt Coins? Tired of false hope and the anticipation waiting around for it to fail?
Send your BTC here: 1JXwGd1N8eP4WWMP6mLe6UNAycDhzqvhJo
No more waiting! Just losses! Guaranteed!!!

Like you said it would be impossible to gather hard evidence that you were part of the scam. However I believe the evidence that I have is conclusive enough for me to reasonably believe that you are one and the same. I included reference links so anyone looking at you trust can look at the evidence and judge for themselves.

If you really have money in your pocket then you should use that instead of borrowing bitcoin. You will save a lot on interest.

Why not just make it neutral trust then, if you do that then I'll just post under every loan request that my Trust list includes a scam accusation and that I am an extortionist. If you want people to judge the trust themselves then this will be best. Because, usually when people look at accounts and see red trust they just walk over it.

I only take loans for higher risk investments, and only at a fraction of what I can actually handle to lose. This method works well for me and I don't really care if I save on interest, it's what I do.

I'm not a scammer, and I haven't been since day one where I posted my free to use bot for peerbet.
I don't know what else I can tell you to get through to you that I have nothing to do with those scams.

It was mentioned before that you could produce PM's between yourself and the bitcoin-stocks guy showing actual communication ;)

I already told you before that those were deleted because I was afraid any link at all to those accounts would make it seem like I had the ability to persuade him. I mean, dude... even though Badbear wouldn't pull through with an IP test, you can still see that I wouldn't consent to it had I actually been an alt to those accounts.

You left up the posts that connected you to him which gives more evidence that you are connected then your PM's (aka private messages). I don't see how having any PM's in your inbox would connect you to them anyway.

You would consent to an IP check because you logged in from different computers that connected to the forum via different VPNs/IP addresses it really wouldn't be hard to do. Like I said before it is more likely that you are partners with them, not the same person.

I don't want to put words in BadBears mouth however I would say that he believes the evidence shows you are associated with them.

I could see how anyone would believe the evidence that you put against me because there is nothing that I have to show you that I am not connected to him. It's as simple as that.

Theoretically, if you were to support some random exchange, say that you trade there all the time and suggest to many people to use it. It's a pretty great exchange. Then one day, boom... all goes to hell, the exchange runs with the money. You find yourself trapped in the same situation that I am in, with some ass on your back about you being in cahoots with them. You're fucked, you have no evidence proving that you aren't with them and all the opposition has is a bunch of posts of you supporting them because you utilized their services.

I already told you how you could prove you are not connected to him but you gave a very flimsy explanation as to why you cannot.

As mentioned above you were staking your reputation by supporting that scam

You did a lot more then advertise that you used their services. You were answering questions and deflecting fears that they were not a scam.

I answered questions made by other people because I have looked into them and their actions quite a bit... I answered the people's questions because I did not feel it necessary for those to look for answers that took me quite a while and a little bit of work to figure out.

I was deflecting fears and false accusations because they were paying out and I believed that they work actually doing what they said they were. (Investing in altcoins, trading and whatnot...)

You were promoting a scam. There should have been evidence that you were in actual communication with them if they were not your partner. Your explanation is flimsy at best and more likely is a lie

You do realize all you have against me is an opinion on how you see things. There is nothing there to prove that I did anything, so I don't see why you can't just leave it as neutral trust and keep the "Extortionist" as negative.

Any reasonable person would make the same conclusion that you are likely partners with bitcoin-stocks et el.

The fact that the 2nd rating is negative or neutral will not have any impact on your overall trust score as one negative rating counts the same way as 20 negative ratings as long as they are from the same person.

But the fact still remains that the second is only an accusation so it should be considered more as neutral trust (comment) rather than negative.

It is an accusation supported by proof. Proof that you have been unable to refute. If you want to refute such evidence against you then I will reconsider the rating I gave you. You have the same MO of another confirmed scammer that happened to post here.

Until you are willing/able to present evidence that refutes the evidence that I have against you I am considering this to be closed and will most likely not be responding further.

How is posting my investments pushing it hard.

How is posting my investments pushing it hard.

I don't want to put words in BadBears mouth however I would say that he believes the evidence shows you are associated with them.

Not at all what I was trying to say.

I guess that was my mistake.

Like I have said many times, anyone who gives negative trust for "trust abuse" is not someone whose trust reports I value. That is exactly what you have now done twice.

None of my business this vigilantism of yours never bothered to look into your history either but now that I did and now that I am here reading this, I see you have taken up the task of fighting scammers here. Though that is a morally good thing to do and benefits the community immensely, it is also a blatant violation of what the trust system is all about.

You are leaving negative feedbacks on - probably scammer - profiles based on assumptions that you have fostered. You are simply leaving negative reps on people's profile who you have had no transactions with.

So if one doesnt trust in a vengeance report, why should one trust a vigilance report ?

I was openly considered a a scammer by Tomatocage, Crumbcake, Johnie, henchman, Vod and now only 1 of them actually still has a grudge with me, and everyone else, as far as my knowledge, have changed their viewpoints, so in the end it was me who was economically hurt by some assumptions that were made about me which were wildly inaccurate.

So you wanna be a forum superhero, all well and good, but dont contradict yourself else you'll become a joke.