Bitcoin Forum

He gave me negative trust because I lost interest in his account... major abuse of the default trust system

Proof of this?

Negative trust feedback left by Quickseller:


See the underlined part. He is warning others who want to trade with you to use escrow. You do understand why he put it.


I hope you aren't spamming for that sig. You can see it easily by checking his trust : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=447475.

   -MZ

Well then you shouldn't of "disappeared".  It's your fault. Only he can remove it.

It's something that is probably deemed untrustworthy by many, if you didn't disappear and explained the issue why you couldn't send the Bitcoin, then he may of been more lenient. Your best bet is to contact him, maybe he will change it to a neutral with a warning to others.

I cannot blame him due to You being a Newbie that when an Escrow was agreed disappeared.


This behaviour set off lots of alarm bells due to being a common scammer reaction. If You're really honest and only mismanaged your communication with him, You're better explaining yourself to him with a PM and apologize. Maybe if you're convincing enough he would turn is feedback to neutral to being only informative to Others without affecting your trust score.

Lol I never asked him to send first.... this guy needs to get off of bitcoin talk and get some pussy

Perhaps this is advice that you could also use.  ;D

Im not sure our feline overlords are the solution here. IMHO OP needs to understand that this behaviour is at least shady. You dont just leave in the middle of a deal without any notice and or explanation.

OP, this behavior was very shady. You should have sent a PM to  Quickseller saying that you have lost interest/cannot pay, and worked it out from there.


Well, this just ruined your chance of getting your negative trust removed.

Woah okay, that's definitely getting your trust removed.

Yeah, true, but put urself in this guys shoes if hes being honest about loosing interes. Atleast one could put in neutral trust, that would be enough.
Innocent until proven guilty, right?

cheers

Yeah, but he handled the situation improperly, he should have PM'ed Quickseller saying that he had lost interest instead of disappearing. It's now up to Quickseller if he wants to change this guy's feedback to neutral or not.

His prices were too high I found cheaper sellers. I never once asked him to send first, this guy's a wasteman

I see that bright guy but without any reference it's one word against the other. There should be more proof to such accusations.

Hope you aren't spamming for that sig.

A PM dump can be done if you do not value my word over the OP's.

It should however be clear that the OP did abandon a deal as he essentially admitted to doing so:
Nor has he denied the allegation in the trust that I left him.

Additionally it should be clear to everyone that the OP is not a newbie account as he went straight to meta when he saw that I gave him negative trust.

I would say on good authority that the OP is likely an alt of SellingHBOGo or if not then someone pretending to be him, although at this point I am not able to publicly say why. This is not speculation and such conclusion was made using BTC addresses that are known to be "owned" by SellingHBOGo

This is a new account with only 5 activity so I really would just trash the account and start over, but also on the otherhand the negative feedback is not just since he didn't actually scam you or anyone. Maybe he lost interest in the account, maybe he gambled his money away, I have no idea, but something like not sending money to an escrow, or not buying something that you agreed on buying (changed his mind etc.) has no grounds for accusing of scammer.

Like I said above I have it on good authority that he is SellingHBOGo

Additionally agreeing to use escrow and then disappearing once escrow is setup is a common tactic that scammers use, as they hope their counterparty decides that they don't want to "wait" for escrow

You're wrong! -ve trust feedback can be rightly handed over EVEN IF a scam didn't actually happened because rules stated: "Negative - You were scammed or you strongly believe that this person is a scammer." (see below)

http://i.gyazo.com/06b1b89369eb4e5f546c7d3a5b5d65da.png

OP fleeing the deal w/o further communication could be both a miscommunication or the common scammer behaviour. Also, Quickseller seems to have access to BTC-address of OP that were previously associated with a known scammer.


+1. Even IF We value your words a PM dump could be good for truth sake as well to allow other forum members to fully understand the situation.

Indeed he is, good catch.

A significant number of the recent posts about default trust are scammer alts, I even have reason to suspect one a while back was an alt of TF, though I can't confirm it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wow, I tough for sure that he was using tor and he made this thread because he was upset that he lost the "tor tax" because the account was essentially ruined from my trust.

Very interesting...

Not all scammers use tor and have to pay the fee. Plenty of free proxies around or could have just used his own IP. Also, people can be still caught using tor as has BadBear has caught users several times.

Accusations usually are made in 'Scam Accusations' but Canadianbitcoins didn't scam him, so it's not a good idea to post there IMHO. If it was in a thread, it would be easy but it was done via PM. Like Quickseller said, if you or anyone want to know more details/verify it, it can be done using a trusted person or Global Moderators.


::)

   -MZ

I never knew you could leave negative feedback if you THINK there is a scam, that sounds a bit weird to me because it justifies leaving negative feedback because of grudges. Well on that note then if you think he's a scammer then go ahead and leave the feedback, I don't really care.

A system that only marked scammers after the fact wouldn't be very good and certainly wouldn't prevent any scams from happening in the first place. If people leave feedback due to grudges it will look very bad on them and if they're on default trust they'll likely be removed. They may even get negative themselves if they're abusing the system in such a way.

I think that they should actually use a neutral trust on grudge and if there is STRONG evidence that the user might actually scam, for example a ponzi investment, hyip, newbie asking for loan without collateral, stuff like that, you can leave negative feedback.

People usually do leave neutrals for that sort of stuff, but sometimes their anger can get the better of them, especially when neutrals don't really count as anything other than a warning to those who are interested.

Quickseller left negative trust on my account when it was hacked. If it wasn't for that then I may have not noticed that someone else was using my account. I do think though that you shouldn't leave someone negative trust unless you can confirm either its a scam or some other illegit reason. But just because someone decided to back out on a loan don't mean it was a scam. Maybe they thought harder about it and changed their mind idk, but I think neg trust shouldn't be left because of that. Neutral yes, but like someone said that don't change anything either.

well he is HBOGo who is now a serial scammer

well if he didn't have to pay the fee then he would have little reason to get upset that I gave negative trust to his account.

I think busting their scams or another account is likely enough to sufficiently piss them off.

even a free zero post account? I would think he would just move onto creating another brand new account and repeat.

I guess it is possible that he was in the middle of a transaction when he was trying to scam when I gave him the trust.

The six minute wait between posts is enough to annoy most people. Wouldn't it annoy you if your accounts kept getting ruined one after the other? It's bound to piss them off. All scammers get irate when people foil their scams. They put a lot of effort into this shit.

@Neonecrox13, @funtotry

In my understanding -ve trust feedback was also fully justified since was not born out from grudges but BTC-address was linked by evidence to known scammer SellingHBOGo.

yes I agree that the 6 minute rule is very annoying. But he was not making any posts. I believe it had zero posts when I gave him negative trust so making a new account would make it so he was just as far from being released from 6 minute jail.

You still have to wait to send messages and then when you create or log into the account(s).

not to mention the rule of maximum 5 pm for an hour, that combined is pretty much annoying

I agree, when I was a newbie I was so annoyed by this. Sadly, there are too many scammers/spammers, so this is done to prevent spam.

Yea I found the 360 second thing REALLY annoying, I guess its for the good of the community though

It is better than the newbie jail. Newbie jail was a worst thing and it made most of them left this forum.

   -MZ