|
Title: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 06:28:31 AM Discussions of nyktalgia's purchased account and whether the negative trust leavers should cancel the negative trust or not.
Original thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973915.0 Please do not post on that thread anymore since the sale has already been completed. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 06:52:01 AM Trust shouldn't be removed just because an account is sold. If this was regular practice people would just fake a sale to themselves in an attempt to get it removed. Accounts should be ruined or lose most of their value once they have used to scam and if people removed feedback under these circumstances scammers could get a lot more for their accounts or as above cheat the feedback into being removed completely.
Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 07:03:23 AM Trust shouldn't be removed just because an account is sold. If this was regular practice people would just fake a sale to themselves in an attempt to get it removed. Accounts should be ruined or lose most of their value once they have used to scam and if people removed feedback under these circumstances scammers could get a lot more for their accounts or as above cheat the feedback into being removed completely. IMO if the buyer provides certain credible proof that he's not associated with the seller, then maybe the trust should be changed to neutral, but still providing the same information. The problem is that the buyer has 0% chance of proving that he's not associated with the seller at all. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: TotalShift on March 09, 2015, 07:07:50 AM Did nyktalgia already scammed some people or the negative feedback is created to warn against possible scam in the future?
If it is the latter I believe there is a chance the feedback should be removed if the buyer is an established and trusted that can be proven that he is not an alt of the user who owns the negative accounts. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 07:22:46 AM Trust shouldn't be removed just because an account is sold. If this was regular practice people would just fake a sale to themselves in an attempt to get it removed. Accounts should be ruined or lose most of their value once they have used to scam and if people removed feedback under these circumstances scammers could get a lot more for their accounts or as above cheat the feedback into being removed completely. IMO if the buyer provides certain credible proof that he's not associated with the seller, then maybe the trust should be changed to neutral, but still providing the same information. The problem is that the buyer has 0% chance of proving that he's not associated with the seller at all. How can you prove you're not associated with someone? That can easily be faked anyway and would be abused in the way I detailed above. Scammers would then easily be able to get their accounts restored to normal. If you buy a negatively trusted account then you have bought a negatively trusted account. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Quickseller on March 09, 2015, 07:32:26 AM Below is a PM I sent to two other members who are on default trust who had asked for my opinion on the matter:
Quote I told him that just because an account was sold does not mean that negative trust should be removed.Doing so would create a number of problems. -It would create more of a market for negative trust accounts, which means that scammers can get something out of their account after scamming. -After this happens enough (remove negative trust from an account after it scams), account buyers will notice and will start to buy negative trust accounts at a discount which will eventually push up the price of negative trust accounts to near that of neutral trust accounts. This will take away the incentive of people not to scam because they would no longer lose the majority of the value of their account when they are caught scamming. -It will cause scammers to pretend to sell their accounts with the hope of getting their negative trust account removed. We saw what is likely a number of fake scammer account sales after Vod removed negative trust from someone that bought an account from me, and posted that on my thread. Below is an additional response to the discussion in hand. Quote They can redeem themselves with many months of good behavior. For the newbie loan scammers I would remove negative trust after 30 days of active participation in the forum. For other members, I would say a more appropriate timeframe would be at least 3-4 months, with a more appropriate time frame being somewhere closer to 6 months. If they are involved in any scam attempts or scammy behavior then I would outright decline to remove negative trust. I would consider them actually posting to be considered "good behavior" and not just abandoning their account for the required time period. If they scammed for smaller amounts then they can repay their victims to get negative trust removed, for larger amounts then their dox gets removed (if they were doxed) but not the negative trust upon repayment. This is my policy at least. Either of you are free to adopt it or adopt a variation of it, and I am interested/willing to hear what policy you think is best. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 07:36:31 AM Good points. Also, Negative trust depreciates over time and if you get a certain number of positive feedbacks it can become 'neutralised' so there is still salvation for some accounts though negative feedback shouldn't be removed and they should still bare the marks of previous behaviour regardless of who now owns them.
Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: shorena on March 09, 2015, 08:04:05 AM Just to give a quick tl;dr for those that didnt read to original thread:
Nyktalgia did not scam, but acted in a way scammer would. They asked for loans with the account as collateral while at the same time trying to sell the account. In both cases they locked the threads and asked for PMs in order to stop negative posts. If thats indeed the reason is a speculation of mine, but it was enough for me to leave negative feedback as a warning. As a result I got several PMs from nyktalgia asking me to remove the negative feedback and offering me positive feedback in return. In interpreted this as buying trust or rather buying the removal of negative trust. I also went out on a limb and said that my negative rating would not have an influence on the buyer. After I read Quicksellers opinion on the subject I changed my mind in this regard. I am certainly willing to remove the negative after some time has passed and the new owner is contributing in a positive way. Regarding the point that the buyer has no chance to prove that they are not acquainted with the seller, I would argue that in this case they look like two different people from timezones at least 8 hours apart. There is also an alt of the seller that was recently reactivated and registered on the same day as nyktalgia. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 08:08:23 AM Did nyktalgia already scammed some people or the negative feedback is created to warn against possible scam in the future? If it is the latter I believe there is a chance the feedback should be removed if the buyer is an established and trusted that can be proven that he is not an alt of the user who owns the negative accounts. Based on the feedbacks, it seems like that he was just asking for loans and haven't actually scammed someone. Trust shouldn't be removed just because an account is sold. If this was regular practice people would just fake a sale to themselves in an attempt to get it removed. Accounts should be ruined or lose most of their value once they have used to scam and if people removed feedback under these circumstances scammers could get a lot more for their accounts or as above cheat the feedback into being removed completely. IMO if the buyer provides certain credible proof that he's not associated with the seller, then maybe the trust should be changed to neutral, but still providing the same information. The problem is that the buyer has 0% chance of proving that he's not associated with the seller at all. How can you prove you're not associated with someone? That can easily be faked anyway and would be abused in the way I detailed above. Scammers would then easily be able to get their accounts restored to normal. If you buy a negatively trusted account then you have bought a negatively trusted account. Like I said: The problem is that the buyer has 0% chance of proving that he's not associated with the seller at all. Below is a PM I sent to two other members who are on default trust who had asked for my opinion on the matter: Quote I told him that just because an account was sold does not mean that negative trust should be removed.Doing so would create a number of problems. -It would create more of a market for negative trust accounts, which means that scammers can get something out of their account after scamming. -After this happens enough (remove negative trust from an account after it scams), account buyers will notice and will start to buy negative trust accounts at a discount which will eventually push up the price of negative trust accounts to near that of neutral trust accounts. This will take away the incentive of people not to scam because they would no longer lose the majority of the value of their account when they are caught scamming. -It will cause scammers to pretend to sell their accounts with the hope of getting their negative trust account removed. We saw what is likely a number of fake scammer account sales after Vod removed negative trust from someone that bought an account from me, and posted that on my thread. Below is an additional response to the discussion in hand. Quote They can redeem themselves with many months of good behavior. For the newbie loan scammers I would remove negative trust after 30 days of active participation in the forum. For other members, I would say a more appropriate timeframe would be at least 3-4 months, with a more appropriate time frame being somewhere closer to 6 months. If they are involved in any scam attempts or scammy behavior then I would outright decline to remove negative trust. I would consider them actually posting to be considered "good behavior" and not just abandoning their account for the required time period. If they scammed for smaller amounts then they can repay their victims to get negative trust removed, for larger amounts then their dox gets removed (if they were doxed) but not the negative trust upon repayment. This is my policy at least. Either of you are free to adopt it or adopt a variation of it, and I am interested/willing to hear what policy you think is best. I agree with you that it creates a demand and a market for negative trust accounts, as I already have noticed at least 3 threads that are WTB negative trusted/banned accounts, and they're probably a result of the selling of nyktalgia's account sales. And at some point an admin or a trusted member has to step out and stop it. Prevention is better than a cure. For the dox part, even if you remove the dox other people probably have quoted it or noted it down. So removing a dox doesn't really do anything. Also, if we use your policy then the scammer can easily pretend to sell his account to one of his sockpuppets, or just paying off a loan directly to the loaner. The record should still be there, but possibly with neutral trust. Also nyktalgia's account doesn't seem to have scammed anyone yet, there are just some signs that he's about to scam. What do you think the solution would be in this case? Good points. Also, Negative trust depreciates over time and if you get a certain number of positive feedbacks it can become 'neutralised' so there is still salvation for some accounts though negative feedback shouldn't be removed and they should still bare the marks of previous behaviour regardless of who now owns them. May I ask what is the rate the negative trust is depreciating by? But by becoming neutralised you'll still have -ve records, which most signature campaigns don't accept. But either way the buyer didn't negotiate at all, it seems with the feedback leavers to get to some kind of solution, so he should take the responsibility of buying this account and not ask for the negative trust to be edited/removed. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 08:10:43 AM Just to give a quick tl;dr for those that didnt read to original thread: Nyktalgia did not scam, but acted in a way scammer would. They asked for loans with the account as collateral while at the same time trying to sell the account. In both cases they locked the threads and asked for PMs in order to stop negative posts. If thats indeed the reason is a speculation of mine, but it was enough for me to leave negative feedback as a warning. As a result I got several PMs from nyktalgia asking me to remove the negative feedback and offering me positive feedback in return. In interpreted this as buying trust or rather buying the removal of negative trust. I also went out on a limb and said that my negative rating would not have an influence on the buyer. After I read Quicksellers opinion on the subject I changed my mind in this regard. I am certainly willing to remove the negative after some time has passed and the new owner is contributing in a positive way. Regarding the point that the buyer has no chance to prove that they are not acquainted with the seller, I would argue that in this case they look like two different people from timezones at least 8 hours apart. There is also an alt of the seller that was recently reactivated and registered on the same day as nyktalgia. It can be another guy, who the seller has employed to do this. There is really no proof either way. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: shorena on March 09, 2015, 08:19:48 AM -snip- It can be another guy, who the seller has employed to do this. There is really no proof either way. Sure, proving a negative is not possible, but I am convinced the two in question are two different people. There also is a way out of the negative trust for the new owner. I have no feedback from redsn0w regarding this, but Im with Quickseller here. If the new owner uses the account in a positive way I see no reason why the account should be tained for eternity. -snip- Quote They can redeem themselves with many months of good behavior. For the newbie loan scammers I would remove negative trust after 30 days of active participation in the forum. For other members, I would say a more appropriate timeframe would be at least 3-4 months, with a more appropriate time frame being somewhere closer to 6 months. If they are involved in any scam attempts or scammy behavior then I would outright decline to remove negative trust. I would consider them actually posting to be considered "good behavior" and not just abandoning their account for the required time period. If they scammed for smaller amounts then they can repay their victims to get negative trust removed, for larger amounts then their dox gets removed (if they were doxed) but not the negative trust upon repayment. This is my policy at least. Either of you are free to adopt it or adopt a variation of it, and I am interested/willing to hear what policy you think is best. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: peligro on March 09, 2015, 08:21:25 AM Removal of trust for sold accounts shouldn't be done. In that case someone can scam, and then sell the account for good money knowing that the buyer can get rid off the negative trust.
Any buyer of negative trust accounts should get negative trust as they are helping a scammer. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 08:23:55 AM -snip- It can be another guy, who the seller has employed to do this. There is really no proof either way. Sure, proving a negative is not possible, but I am convinced the two in question are two different people. There also is a way out of the negative trust for the new owner. I have no feedback from redsn0w regarding this, but Im with Quickseller here. If the new owner uses the account in a positive way I see no reason why the account should be tained for eternity. -snip- Quote They can redeem themselves with many months of good behavior. For the newbie loan scammers I would remove negative trust after 30 days of active participation in the forum. For other members, I would say a more appropriate timeframe would be at least 3-4 months, with a more appropriate time frame being somewhere closer to 6 months. If they are involved in any scam attempts or scammy behavior then I would outright decline to remove negative trust. I would consider them actually posting to be considered "good behavior" and not just abandoning their account for the required time period. If they scammed for smaller amounts then they can repay their victims to get negative trust removed, for larger amounts then their dox gets removed (if they were doxed) but not the negative trust upon repayment. This is my policy at least. Either of you are free to adopt it or adopt a variation of it, and I am interested/willing to hear what policy you think is best. That's actually contradicting with one of his points. If you guys do this, then that will bring the trades for negative trusted accounts more and more popular(Thus bringing the prices for negative accounts up), because there's a pretty simple way of getting rid of the negative trust. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: hilariousandco on March 09, 2015, 08:29:49 AM Good points. Also, Negative trust depreciates over time and if you get a certain number of positive feedbacks it can become 'neutralised' so there is still salvation for some accounts though negative feedback shouldn't be removed and they should still bare the marks of previous behaviour regardless of who now owns them. May I ask what is the rate the negative trust is depreciating by? But by becoming neutralised you'll still have -ve records, which most signature campaigns don't accept. But either way the buyer didn't negotiate at all, it seems with the feedback leavers to get to some kind of solution, so he should take the responsibility of buying this account and not ask for the negative trust to be edited/removed. All different I think. Depends on several factors including number of negatives and their values, when they were left, then on the opposite all those factors but with positives. You'll notice over time that some accounts are marked as scammers but that will go away after a while and they get an orange number in the middle value. Sometimes even a couple of trusted negatives wont show up if you've got enough green (see marco's account). Regarding the point that the buyer has no chance to prove that they are not acquainted with the seller, I would argue that in this case they look like two different people from timezones at least 8 hours apart. There is also an alt of the seller that was recently reactivated and registered on the same day as nyktalgia. It can be another guy, who the seller has employed to do this. There is really no proof either way. Yep. It may be a legit sale in this case but people will quickly learn to exploit it. Not hard to use a buddy to fake a sale as opposed to using an alt account. Allowing this just sets a really bad precedent and smart scammers will be able to get their account neutralised ready to scam or use again very easily. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Mitchell on March 09, 2015, 08:30:26 AM If you buy an account, you buy everything. This includes debts and trust ratings. These shouldn't be removed just because it's now someone else's property. You wouldn't ask the person who broke a toy you bought from someone else to repair it.
Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: redsn0w on March 09, 2015, 08:30:44 AM -snip- It can be another guy, who the seller has employed to do this. There is really no proof either way. Sure, proving a negative is not possible, but I am convinced the two in question are two different people. There also is a way out of the negative trust for the new owner. I have no feedback from redsn0w regarding this, but Im with Quickseller here. If the new owner uses the account in a positive way I see no reason why the account should be tained for eternity. -snip- Quote They can redeem themselves with many months of good behavior. For the newbie loan scammers I would remove negative trust after 30 days of active participation in the forum. For other members, I would say a more appropriate timeframe would be at least 3-4 months, with a more appropriate time frame being somewhere closer to 6 months. If they are involved in any scam attempts or scammy behavior then I would outright decline to remove negative trust. I would consider them actually posting to be considered "good behavior" and not just abandoning their account for the required time period. If they scammed for smaller amounts then they can repay their victims to get negative trust removed, for larger amounts then their dox gets removed (if they were doxed) but not the negative trust upon repayment. This is my policy at least. Either of you are free to adopt it or adopt a variation of it, and I am interested/willing to hear what policy you think is best. I will not remove the negative trust, the new owner knew what he bought. As a lot of you said : it can be impossible to determine if the new owner is not associated with the old, in this case we cannot remove the negative trusts. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: shorena on March 09, 2015, 08:33:06 AM -snip- That's actually contradicting with one of his points. If you guys do this, then that will bring the trades for negative trusted accounts more and more popular(Thus bringing the prices for negative accounts up), because there's a pretty simple way of getting rid of the negative trust. I dont think contributing in a positive way for 3-6 months would be considered simple by most, especially if they try this as a business model to redeem accounts. Its also only possible for those that got negative feedback as a warning, not for actual scammers. -rephrasing- Any buyer of negative trust accounts should get negative trust as they are helping a scammer. But the account in question did not scam to the best of everyons knowledge they just tried to or arguably have bad trading practices. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 08:33:35 AM Yep. It may be a legit sale in this case but people will quickly learn to exploit it. Not hard to use a buddy to fake a sale as opposed to using an alt account. Allowing this just sets a really bad precedent and smart scammers will be able to get their account neutralised ready to scam or use again very easily. We can't even be sure that it is a legit sale in this case. In my opinion: if you buy an account, you buy everything. This includes debts and trust ratings. These shouldn't be removed just because it's now someone else's property. I agree, but this is a certainly debatable topic. Wait, were you bitcoininformation or just has the same avatar? Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: redsn0w on March 09, 2015, 08:38:30 AM If you buy an account, you buy everything. This includes debts and trust ratings. These shouldn't be removed just because it's now someone else's property. You wouldn't ask the person who broke a toy you bought from someone else to repair it. Exactly, I am agree with you. Maybe after some months and trades he can gain a couple of positive trusts. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 08:39:41 AM -snip- That's actually contradicting with one of his points. If you guys do this, then that will bring the trades for negative trusted accounts more and more popular(Thus bringing the prices for negative accounts up), because there's a pretty simple way of getting rid of the negative trust. I dont think contributing in a positive way for 3-6 months would be considered simple by most, especially if they try this as a business model to redeem accounts. Its also only possible for those that got negative feedback as a warning, not for actual scammers. -rephrasing- Any buyer of negative trust accounts should get negative trust as they are helping a scammer. But the account in question did not scam to the best of everyons knowledge they just tried to or arguably have bad trading practices. Yeah, well IMO it's pretty simple. If a guy can just post a post or two to show someone that he's still online and active etc., then it would be very profitable when they can buy accounts in bulk and when the negative trusts are gone, resale it for a much higher price, thus reaping a large profit. If the account is a hero or legendary(I doubt though), then the owner probably want his personal account back, and probably would consider this method of removing his negative trust. But I think if we still can leave a record that the account has previously received a negative feedback by giving a neutral feedback, that would be better. Although that some people don't really check the feedbacks but only the trust score, if doing a large deal I'm sure that the dealer will be careful enough to check it. Anyone is entitled to their opinion though, and in this case I respect Quickseller's personal opinion. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: Mitchell on March 09, 2015, 08:40:23 AM I agree, but this is a certainly debatable topic. It's debatable for some, but it isn't for me. And yes, I was bitcoininformation. I changed my display name a while back. ;) Wait, were you bitcoininformation or just has the same avatar? Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: SaltySpitoon on March 09, 2015, 08:41:09 AM Trust is all subjective anyway so it doesn't matter. There is a basic divide in this discussion, those that believe an account sold gets a fresh slate, and those that don't. If all of the people who don't believe they get a fresh slate leave negative feedback, only those that believe that will care about their feedback.
I will not remove the negative trust, the new owner knew what he bought. As a lot of you said : it can be impossible to determine if the new owner is not associated with the old, in this case we cannot remove the negative trusts. redsn0w, if I may use your comment to elaborate. Lets say that redsn0w believes what they do, they bought what they bought, no clean slate for them. I on the other hand, believe that after the account was sold, the new owner no longer deserves the negative feedback. If I was to buy a pizza from nyktalgia, I'd look at their feedback to determine the best course of action. I see redsn0w's feedback, but I disagree. We don't need to hold a petition to set trust rules or get redsn0w to change their feedback, I will just personally ignore redsn0w's note, because I don't agree with them on the matter. And we proceed with the deal. We change the senario, and I'm hilariousandco (no I'm not really, because someone will misquote this if I dont mention that we are not the same person (or are we?)) I agree with redsn0w that the negative trust is deserved. I value their opinion, and before I buy that pizza from them, I take what I consider appropriate measures. My point being, feedback is relative, as long as people explain why they are leaving the feedback they are, others can judge it's validity based on their own concerns. Thats the reason the feedback system doesn't need rules, because each person will use it differently based on the situation and what they personally believe. Numbers and red letters don't mean anything, what matters is the content of the feedback itself. The source it comes from, the reason, and the backing. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: redsn0w on March 09, 2015, 08:45:21 AM Trust is all subjective anyway so it doesn't matter. There is a basic divide in this discussion, those that believe an account sold gets a fresh slate, and those that don't. If all of the people who don't believe they get a fresh slate leave negative feedback, only those that believe that will care about their feedback. I will not remove the negative trust, the new owner knew what he bought. As a lot of you said : it can be impossible to determine if the new owner is not associated with the old, in this case we cannot remove the negative trusts. redsn0w, if I may use your comment to elaborate. Lets say that redsn0w believes what they do, they bought what they bought, no clean slate for them. I on the other hand, believe that after the account was sold, the new owner no longer deserves the negative feedback. If I was to buy a pizza from nyktalgia, I'd look at their feedback to determine the best course of action. I see redsn0w's feedback, but I disagree. We don't need to hold a petition to set trust rules or get redsn0w to change their feedback, I will just personally ignore redsn0w's note, because I don't agree with them on the matter. And we proceed with the deal. We change the senario, and I'm hilariousandco (no I'm not really, because someone will misquote this if I dont mention that we are not the same person (or are we?)) I agree with redsn0w that the negative trust is deserved. I value their opinion, and before I buy that pizza from them, I take what I consider appropriate measures. My point being, feedback is relative, as long as people explain why they are leaving the feedback they are, others can judge it's validity based on their own concerns. Thats the reason the feedback system doesn't need rules, because each person will use it differently based on the situation and what they personally believe. Numbers and red letters don't mean anything, what matters is the content of the feedback itself. The source it comes from, the reason, and the backing. Yes, no problem. Both your cases are correct, a negative trust should not stop someone to buy/sell here in the forum. Everyone should trade with his own diligence and the use/not-use of escrow. Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: shorena on March 09, 2015, 08:52:01 AM -snip- Yeah, well IMO it's pretty simple. If a guy can just post a post or two to show someone that he's still online and active etc., then it would be very profitable when they can buy accounts in bulk and when the negative trusts are gone, resale it for a much higher price, thus reaping a large profit. I wouldnt call that contributing. A few bullshit posts aint gonna cut it. I cant tell you what will, but I guess we will see in the future If the account is a hero or legendary(I doubt though), then the owner probably want his personal account back, and probably would consider this method of removing his negative trust. But I think if we still can leave a record that the account has previously received a negative feedback by giving a neutral feedback, that would be better. Although that some people don't really check the feedbacks but only the trust score, if doing a large deal I'm sure that the dealer will be careful enough to check it. Anyone is entitled to their opinion though, and in this case I respect Quickseller's personal opinion. Anyone that just goes by the red/green number is a fool. Even the feedback without a proper ref link is next to worthless unless its by someone I deem trustworthy and understand how they leave feedback. -snip- Numbers and red letters don't mean anything, what matters is the content of the feedback itself. The source it comes from, the reason, and the backing. /signed Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: SaltySpitoon on March 09, 2015, 08:54:08 AM Yes, no problem. Both your cases are correct, a negative trust should not stop someone to buy/sell here in the forum. Everyone should trade with his own diligence and the use/not-use of escrow. The sooner people realize that, the sooner 90% of the issues with the trust system are immediately fixed. My favorite person to trade with was Dank, because the goofy bastard always included some sort of interesting surprise that left me on the ground clutching my sides in an attept to cling to any air that my laughing gasps would allow into my lungs. He was a confirmed scammer, so I just made sure I took appropriate measures in trading with him, ie the use of escrow when necessary, etc. But the feedback left against him allowed me to judge potential threats. Someone who bought an account from someone exhibiting scammy behavior in my opinion would not warrant the same level of paranoia as trading with someone who ran off with 1,000 Bitcoins from an exchange or something like that. But, If I was trading with nyktalgia, the fact that they bought the account from someone who was a potential scammer is definitely information that I'd like to know. People leaving negative feedback, keep up the good work. People who disagree with the negative feedback, I agree with you. :P Title: Re: Discussion of nyktalgia's purchased account Post by: redsn0w on March 09, 2015, 08:57:42 AM Yes, no problem. Both your cases are correct, a negative trust should not stop someone to buy/sell here in the forum. Everyone should trade with his own diligence and the use/not-use of escrow. The sooner people realize that, the sooner 90% of the issues with the trust system are immediately fixed. My favorite person to trade with was Dank, because the goofy bastard always included some sort of interesting surprise that left me on the ground clutching my sides in an attept to cling to any air that my laughing gasps would allow into my lungs. He was a confirmed scammer, so I just made sure I took appropriate measures in trading with him, ie the use of escrow when necessary, etc. But the feedback left against him allowed me to judge potential threats. Someone who bought an account from someone exhibiting scammy behavior in my opinion would not warrant the same level of paranoia as trading with someone who ran off with 1,000 Bitcoins from an exchange or something like that. But, If I was trading with nyktalgia, the fact that they bought the account from someone who was a potential scammer is definitely information that I'd like to know. People leaving negative feedback, keep up the good work. People who disagree with the negative feedback, I agree with you. :P I agree with you, indeed I have also left him a neutral feedback "The account was bought from najzenmajsen." with the reference and I think this is necessary for the other users (if they trade with him). Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 09, 2015, 09:08:22 AM -snip- Yeah, well IMO it's pretty simple. If a guy can just post a post or two to show someone that he's still online and active etc., then it would be very profitable when they can buy accounts in bulk and when the negative trusts are gone, resale it for a much higher price, thus reaping a large profit. I wouldnt call that contributing. A few bullshit posts aint gonna cut it. I cant tell you what will, but I guess we will see in the future If the account is a hero or legendary(I doubt though), then the owner probably want his personal account back, and probably would consider this method of removing his negative trust. But I think if we still can leave a record that the account has previously received a negative feedback by giving a neutral feedback, that would be better. Although that some people don't really check the feedbacks but only the trust score, if doing a large deal I'm sure that the dealer will be careful enough to check it. Anyone is entitled to their opinion though, and in this case I respect Quickseller's personal opinion. Anyone that just goes by the red/green number is a fool. Even the feedback without a proper ref link is next to worthless unless its by someone I deem trustworthy and understand how they leave feedback. -snip- Numbers and red letters don't mean anything, what matters is the content of the feedback itself. The source it comes from, the reason, and the backing. /signed Fair enough, like you said we'll see in the future. Changed the title to "Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts" Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:04:03 AM I am the original owner I got hacked or some shit I can't access my account anymore. I don't even trade or care but I am being trolled for calling out 999dice as a scam. This is how scummy they are....
My account was never bought or sold whoever is making up these lies and fake feedback reviews is responsible. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 13, 2015, 08:12:54 AM I am the original owner I got hacked or some shit I can't access my account anymore. I don't even trade or care but I am being trolled for calling out 999dice as a scam. This is how scummy they are.... My account was never bought or sold whoever is making up these lies and fake feedback reviews is responsible. That's interesting. Did you try contacting theymos? Also are you able to sign a message with a previously used address? And when was it hacked? Was the negative trusts left after your account was hacked? Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 08:15:42 AM I am the original owner I got hacked or some shit I can't access my account anymore. I don't even trade or care but I am being trolled for calling out 999dice as a scam. This is how scummy they are.... My account was never bought or sold whoever is making up these lies and fake feedback reviews is responsible. "Negative trusts" aren't responsible (the contrary). Now you should give a full and real explanation to theymos (through PM) and why not also to open a thread here in the meta (with all the information). You should build your "security" it is easy to say " Damn, my forum account was hacked". Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 13, 2015, 08:21:08 AM I am the original owner I got hacked or some shit I can't access my account anymore. I don't even trade or care but I am being trolled for calling out 999dice as a scam. This is how scummy they are.... My account was never bought or sold whoever is making up these lies and fake feedback reviews is responsible. "Negative trusts" aren't responsible (the contrary). Now you should give a full and real explanation to theymos (through PM) and why not also to open a thread here in the meta (with all the information). He might just as well doing this because he wants his account back, after the buyer has paid. It's also dodgy that he's posting on 999dice threads all the time, as opposed to trying to prove he's the legitimate user(Which is hard now because someone already has bought the accounts from him). Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:38:38 AM The only proof I have is a few messages from my e-mail that were sent on that account. I know it had something to do with 999dice. I think it's odd they changed my signature to primedice. I'm not sure what happened, but I know it was somebody from 999dice, most likely Justin. Who is just another alias for Jake, who is a known scammer and owner of 999dice.
I don't really care it's just a forum account, I don't ever expect to get it back. This honestly just came to my attention I don't use it so much. I'm more pissed at the fact that they would go thru such extensive measures to ruin my account/name. I must have pissed somebody off hahaha..... Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:41:07 AM My e-mail is no longer linked to that account cuz it was hacked so I can't even recover my password lol...... wtf
http://prntscr.com/6g5n7h That is all the proof I hvae the link is directed to my account. I never sold any accounts so not sure what you are trying to say. I don't even trade on bitcointalk ever...... I'm not even sure when it was hacked but it was sometime between when i called 999dice a scam and now, which is the span of 2 weeks at the most maybe.... I just became aware my account was hacked after I couldn't log in... I believe the negative feedback came afterwards, I knew they tried to downvote me for no reason by a known hacker, so I'm sure it was the same guy he goes by Justin on 999dice, pretty sure he is also the owner of 999dice but won't admit to that. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 08:44:38 AM My e-mail is no longer linked to that account cuz it was hacked so I can't even recover my password lol...... wtf http://prntscr.com/6g5n7h That is all the proof I hvae the link is directed to my account. najzenmajsen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=316167) has bought the account, maybe you can try to contact him for more information (like the address of the "seller"). Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:45:42 AM My e-mail is no longer linked to that account cuz it was hacked so I can't even recover my password lol...... wtf http://prntscr.com/6g5n7h That is all the proof I hvae the link is directed to my account. najzenmajsen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=316167) has bought the account, maybe you can try to contact him for more information (like the address of the "seller"). So you are saying I could have sold my account? HHAA how much did he pay for it? Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 08:47:17 AM My e-mail is no longer linked to that account cuz it was hacked so I can't even recover my password lol...... wtf http://prntscr.com/6g5n7h That is all the proof I hvae the link is directed to my account. najzenmajsen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=316167) has bought the account, maybe you can try to contact him for more information (like the address of the "seller"). So you are saying I could have sold my account? HHAA how much did he pay for it? I am not "saying" anything, this is the thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973915.0 everyone should judge with own mind. It seems he paid 0.05 bitcoin. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:52:04 AM haha that is fucked up scumbags will do anything for money i guess....... just leave the negative feedback its not even the rightful account owner who bought/sold it w/e..... I hope whoever is responsible reads this someday while they are burning in hell.
You can see on that post I had my soundcloud.com/dismal-realm that is proof it was me, but they changed that shit after they hacked me..... Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 08:56:35 AM This is the last forum post I had before my account was hacked... somebody on 999dice is def responsible.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=959893.140 Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 08:58:01 AM haha that is fucked up scumbags will do anything for money i guess....... just leave the negative feedback its not even the rightful account owner who bought/sold it w/e..... I hope whoever is responsible reads this someday while they are burning in hell. You can see on that post I had my soundcloud.com/dismal-realm that is proof it was me, but they changed that shit after they hacked me..... Now the unique possibility is : Open a thread here in the meta, follow this instrunction for "try" to recover the account (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=497545.0) and explain all the situation (if you want). Good luck. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 13, 2015, 08:58:38 AM My e-mail is no longer linked to that account cuz it was hacked so I can't even recover my password lol...... wtf http://prntscr.com/6g5n7h That is all the proof I hvae the link is directed to my account. najzenmajsen (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=316167) has bought the account, maybe you can try to contact him for more information (like the address of the "seller"). So you are saying I could have sold my account? HHAA how much did he pay for it? Probably BTC0.05, could be less. "You" were asking for BTC0.5, then lowered to BTC0.4, BTC0.3 etc. etc. It's sold over PM so no one really knows the exact price. EDIT: I looked at your post history and this seems like the last post you were talking about: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=959893.msg10504537#msg10504537 And after that the claimed "hacker" was mainly posting on btc-flow, and asking for a 1 BTC loan. Any ideas? Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: shorena on March 13, 2015, 09:05:58 AM Wait what?
You did not use your account for almost a year. This[1] post is from January 2014. You used both accounts to post about 999dice and your .6 BTC[2][3][4] on 2015.02.18. You also claim to have lost more and less, depending on the post. Ill quote them below, just in case. 3/4 threads I used as reference earlier[5] seem to have disappeared. Maybe mods deleted them because its spam, I dont know. 10 days later[6], 2015.02.28 "someone" desperate for coins started to take loans and selling the account at the same time. Now almost 2 weeks afterwards you realize your account was "hacked"? [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=318589.msg4425914#msg4425914 [2] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=959893.msg10502902#msg10502902 [3] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=307425.msg10498917#msg10498917 [4] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=959893.msg10499441#msg10499441 [5] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=973915.msg10647437#msg10647437 [6] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=972015.msg10614151#msg10614151 Where the fuck is my .6 still no word form jake. No possible way I sent to the wrong address, how is it possible I sent to a random 999dice account out of all the BTC addresss in the WORLD, makes 0 fucking sense just like losing more than you can ever win at a supposed lower edge website haha fuck you 666 satan dice for stealing my coins! This is bullshit, and aint shit I can do and you know it until you get royally fucked! I'm fucking confused too how I send .6 from one account to the next but it gets lost magically.... This site is a SCAM either way you should be glad you can't access it! Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 09:11:34 AM @shorena,
now nyktalgia1 will say "everything is possible" ; at this point only the admin can investigate (but they are busy) so we will continue to the infinity. Everyone should "build" his security and the forum is not responsable if someone will lose his account (give a valid story, be truthful and maybe an admin will believe you). Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 09:18:43 AM I honestly am just as confused as anyone else. Doesn't matter what you believe but I'm telling the truth somebody is just trying to piss me off and ruin my integrity while making a few bucks. some people just have no life, luckily there is nothing large at stake other than my account which I tried to remain reputable but someone destroyed that in a matter of days. I don't use forums unless there is something important and Justin from 999dice brought it to my attention the other day or I wouldn't even have known it was hacked and I believe he is responsible. he's a known hacker and told everyone to give me bad reviews and someone could have just taken it a step further lol... he would be the best place to start... why is there primedice in the Sig now? it all seems so fishy....ppl r scum what can I say...
Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 09:26:55 AM I honestly am just as confused as anyone else. Doesn't matter what you believe but I'm telling the truth somebody is just trying to piss me off and ruin my integrity while making a few bucks. some people just have no life, luckily there is nothing large at stake other than my account which I tried to remain reputable but someone destroyed that in a matter of days. I don't use forums unless there is something important and Justin from 999dice brought it to my attention the other day or I wouldn't even have known it was hacked and I believe he is responsible. he's a known hacker and told everyone to give me bad reviews and someone could have just taken it a step further lol... he would be the best place to start... why is there primedice in the Sig now? it all seems so fishy....ppl r scum what can I say... I assume you don't want to get back your forum account (if you are the real owner). So why are you continuing to post in this thread? If you want try to recover your account, this would be the steps : 1) Open one and explain all the situation in one post, 2) contact theymos (I gave you the link of the thread with all the explanation), 3) wait. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: Berau on March 13, 2015, 09:31:42 AM I honestly am just as confused as anyone else. Doesn't matter what you believe but I'm telling the truth somebody is just trying to piss me off and ruin my integrity while making a few bucks. some people just have no life, luckily there is nothing large at stake other than my account which I tried to remain reputable but someone destroyed that in a matter of days. I don't use forums unless there is something important and Justin from 999dice brought it to my attention the other day or I wouldn't even have known it was hacked and I believe he is responsible. he's a known hacker and told everyone to give me bad reviews and someone could have just taken it a step further lol... he would be the best place to start... why is there primedice in the Sig now? it all seems so fishy....ppl r scum what can I say... I assume you don't want to get back your forum account (if you are the real owner). So why are you continuing to post in this thread? If you want try to recover your account, this would be the steps : 1) Open one and explain all the situation in one post, 2) contact theymos (I gave you the link of the thread with all the explanation), 3) wait. This guys weird. He just wants to call people scum. Doesn't even want his account back after its hacked. And he didn't try to login into his account for 2 weeks after the account was hacked. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: shorena on March 13, 2015, 09:35:44 AM @shorena, now nyktalgia1 will say "everything is possible" ; at this point only the admin can investigate (but they are busy) so we will continue to the infinity. Everyone should "build" his security and the forum is not responsable if someone will lose his account (give a valid story, be truthful and maybe an admin will believe you). Yeah, the more I see of this the more I think Quickseller is correct and that there should be no second chance, ever, for no one. You either can secure your account and trades properly or you are fucked. People are still falling for the same bullshit they did fall for in the 90s. Oh, Ill just download this .exe file from some stranger on the Internet because it promisses big money. Oh, I got a mail from info@honestly.not.hacking.promisse.com I think Ill just open it. http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/03/Fuck-This-Shit-GIFS.gif Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 09:45:49 AM What is the point of getting it back I already have negative feedback on this one for even talking about it! LOL Might as well just cut it as a loss...... fuck you shorena I even said I don't care if I get it back and you still give me negative feedback hahaha I was just stating it is my account because it is you sorry sack of shit..... LOL You people are all the same, shorena is probably a scammer as well.....
Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 09:48:52 AM @shorena, now nyktalgia1 will say "everything is possible" ; at this point only the admin can investigate (but they are busy) so we will continue to the infinity. Everyone should "build" his security and the forum is not responsable if someone will lose his account (give a valid story, be truthful and maybe an admin will believe you). Yeah, the more I see of this the more I think Quickseller is correct and that there should be no second chance, ever, for no one. You either can secure your account and trades properly or you are fucked. People are still falling for the same bullshit they did fall for in the 90s. Oh, Ill just download this .exe file from some stranger on the Internet because it promisses big money. Oh, I got a mail from info@honestly.not.hacking.promisse.com I think Ill just open it. http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/03/Fuck-This-Shit-GIFS.gif Lol just shut the fuck up you lying sack of shit scumbag...... I don't give a fuck about my account it is the principle that scumbags like you would stoop so low just to try to get at me. I don't even care it's flattering you care so much. I'm flattered people would go thru such effort to make me upset, but I think it's just pathetic how low people will sink. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: redsn0w on March 13, 2015, 09:54:47 AM This will be my last post here (I will try to don't post again).
It seems you don't understand, if you will prove that your account was first hacked and after sold to another forum user (najzenmajsen), theymos will recover your account (if he wants). After, I think the negative trusts will be removed and you will enjoy "again" your forum account. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 09:58:37 AM This will be my last post here (I will try to don't post again). It seems you don't understand, if you will prove that your account was first hacked and after sold to another forum user (najzenmajsen), theymos will recover your account (if he wants). After, I think the negative trusts will be removed and you will enjoy "again" your forum account. I will try but not expecting any results, either way. I guess I'll see what happens but not expecting anything. It is obvious people are doing this just to be vindictive and the negative feedback on my account isn't even legit, or could be due to the fact that my account was sold. I don't know what happened, I usually post in waves I don't consistently use these forums and I wouldn't have even been aware if Justin from 999dice hadn't told me. But we shall see what happens, and maybe I can clear my name :D Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: sho_road_warrior on March 13, 2015, 02:14:22 PM -snip- Lol just shut the fuck up you lying sack of shit scumbag...... I dont lie, its one of my principles. Its not always easy to follow though. I don't give a fuck about my account it is the principle that scumbags like you would stoop so low just to try to get at me. I don't even care it's flattering you care so much. I dont actually care about you or your account. I care about this board, about some of the people here and espcially about those here that improve it and keep it functional. I was frustrated early, yes, but you personally are not the reason. I'm flattered people would go thru such effort to make me upset, but I think it's just pathetic how low people will sink. I think you have problems perceiving the world, as it is not centered around you. Title: Re: Discussion of trading negative trusted accounts Post by: nyktalgia1 on March 13, 2015, 02:22:05 PM -snip- Lol just shut the fuck up you lying sack of shit scumbag...... I dont lie, its one of my principles. Its not always easy to follow though. I don't give a fuck about my account it is the principle that scumbags like you would stoop so low just to try to get at me. I don't even care it's flattering you care so much. I dont actually care about you or your account. I care about this board, about some of the people here and espcially about those here that improve it and keep it functional. I was frustrated early, yes, but you personally are not the reason. I'm flattered people would go thru such effort to make me upset, but I think it's just pathetic how low people will sink. I think you have problems perceiving the world, as it is not centered around you. You care about the board yet you are willing to make false claims and reports about people you have no idea about? Spare me the hypocrisy........ just take my original advice and s hut the fuck up thanks....... |
