Bitcoin Forum

Hi,
Three months ago I called out a scammer "Mrklye" for being a scammer as he defrauded many people with his Just-Dice scam. He immediately accuses me of being some guy named KoS, a guy I assumed has bad blood with this guy. Anyways, I never made a big deal of it cause MrKlye became red trusted and no one would believe him. I call him out again in JustDice chat one day for still gambling and one of his buds BTCvilla or whatever leaves me a rating saying Im that KoS guy again.

Fast forward to today, I call out quickseller for being unethical with his post of stickying a thread where he is recommending everyone use escrow and ironically he offers escrow. This is a conflict of interest and his pushiness multiple times to get it sticky-ed is unethical. I call him out and he leaves me negative rating saying Im this kos dude when I 1) have no idea who he is and 2) im NOT HIM!!!

Here is where i call him out for being unethical https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1040193.0

and then after here is link to my trust page where he retaliates in anger https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=407475

where is any evidence i am this scammer or whoever this kos guy is?? there is no proof, i troll sometimes but i am no scammer!

 ??? ??? :-[ :-X

THIS GUY SHOULD NOT BE ON THE DEFAULT TRUST LIST LIKE WHAT THE HELL! HE RUIN MY REP WHEN I HAVE DONE NOTHING!!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH FORUM!

I demand that quickseller remove his rating or be removed from the default trust list. He is mad I called him unethical and has retailiated into following suit of other scammer's accusations in retaliation and calling me a scammer when not one piece of evidence has been provided

His lack of providing evidence with his rating and ruining someone shows how immature he is. he should not be on this default trust list.

Dude, just get help. You are a Drug addict, addicted gambler and alcoholic.

You had posted a while back with one of your alts mistakenly, deleted it and then reposted with your bitcoindistrubator account. You also just so happen to live in the same area as KoS (Baltimore, MD area), just so happen to do cash deposits at the same banks, all just so happen to post in the gambling section and just so happen to have a grudge against Vod. Give me a break.

I am not mad that you called me unethical. I could care less what you think.

You need to get some help. Thought you quit with the gambling?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1057133.msg11341622#msg11341622

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=923992.msg10145050#msg10145050 (https://i.imgur.com/mg1eTsF.png?1)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=916654.msg10064253#msg10064253 (https://i.imgur.com/YFGjG4A.png)

Whatever happened to you? You were pretty cool at one point.....

Quickseller posted here but deleted his post quickly... Quite suspicious.

(any mod can verify what I'm saying by retreating the post)

---

In this post, Quickseller claimed that he thought they were the same user because they had a similar desktop configuration.

He said the unread emails were the same and the icons were in the same array.

---

Look at the image more than 30 seconds and you'll see that non of his assumptions are true. Seriously Quickseller, I'd expect something better for a negative trust rating. You're just speculating that they're the same person because of a similar screenshot. If that makes you suspicious to personally believe that they're the same person leave a neutral comment, still does the same job. No need to leave negative feedback with such dubious evidence (which you probably discovered after posting the rating since you didn't add any reference).

Check my post above. Coincidence? LOL... not sure what image you were looking at.

BitcoinDistributor = KingofSports. I was one of the few who seen posts that were made it quickly deleted and reposted on his other accounts. Why didn't I leave negative feedback? Looked like he abadoned those accounts plus I didn't want to deal with the massive trolling, harassment and death threats like what were made towards Vod  :-\

I have no reason to lie here either. Other members should be warned though, especially after his alt AlabamaFan1 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=162265) and the claimed hack incident.

We're talking about the same images. QS posted on the same topic, stating the same thing as you and deleted his post shortly after. Makes me wonder if you could be one of his alts and he had the same sob story prepared to be posted by his alts but mistakenly did so on his main.

Anyway, don't expect another reply on the topic from me. I feel like I've put myself through enough QS drama by now. :p

I am not an alt of xeter, although why would it matter? Neither of us have scammed in any way, and there are no rules against having alt accounts.

I deleted my post because we both happened to stumble across the same information, and as a result we both posted the same information.

LOL, could see that one coming. For the record, no I'm not quickseller. Also, the post I seen that was deleted and remade by KingofSports's alt was the SAME EXACT post, not similar. Another coincidence?  ::)

Stop trying to make this a quickseller thing. I was trying to warn other members here about BitcoinDistributor, no point in creating another thread to draw out the trolls  :P

KingofSports, BitcoinDistributor, AlabamaFan1, WhatsBitcoin or whatever alt he will now go under needs help. Doesn't look like he has any plans on getting it though.

Had a friend on here who knows me personally in real life text me about this popping up...

Poor guy. Actually feel bad for this guy, he actually isn't one of my 3 accounts but as they say "another innocent person is shot to death daily". Like poor jesus, you guys are like the jews who killed him when he was innocent, the devil filled in your heart. Looking into what happened, it looked like Quickseller has no maturity and no basis to make his argument but good for him. Xetsr actually has a little bit of backing surprisingly but still wrong. As for my desktop screen shown in my old KOS account, its essentially the default bar for all Macs from 2010-2012 with the addition of Tor. Vod isn't even as bad as quickseller, since Vod doesn't try to unethically use his reputation to gain him further wealth like Quickseller does obviously in that thread this is all about.

Bitcoindistributor I'll sell you one of my accounts for 0.10 BTC if you like. We can use Tomatocage for escrow.

@Quickseller, bro i "lol-ed" at your comment...you really don't know me. I do have a gambling addiction, I by no means have it under control, I won't lie to admit that one. I still gamble $100 or so every couple weekends. Its not anywhere it used to be where I was betting $2000 in volume daily but its not fully gone either. Am I happy with it? Nah. Is it still trouble? A little. Is my income more than enough to support the current level of the problem? Heck yes. I work for KPMG and if you know anything about that firm, they are amazing firm which pays well.

@Quickseller the part I "lol-ed" about is the fact that you call me a drug addict / alcoholic. If you know my girlfriend or any of my friends they would gladly tell you that I actually dislike drinking in most cases. Every now and then I'll drink and play some games with friends, or go out to the bar but its been years since I threw up or blacked out or anything irresponsible relating to alcohol. Never had an issue with alcohol, I'm very conscious about my appearance and know what happens if you drink too much (beer gut)... so yeah thats not the case.

@Quickseller drug addict? Ha. I've been on random drug testing with my career for over a year now. I only get tested every couple months but its still not worth taking any drugs. I'll give you the total number of times I tried drugs just for your info since you really want to blast my name and call me an addict:

Special K - 0
Heroin - 0
Oxycoxtin pill - 2 times
Xanax - 1 time
Weed - 20-30 times lifetime
Molly / MDMA - 5 times

Those 20-30 times were when I was with a girl who smoked a lot, it got me a lot of sex I gotta admit. Heres a sex tip too for all: smoking weed will make your dick 10x harder then usual when erect. For the girl and you it makes sex feel 10x more amazing if you do it right.

Think that covers the most of that. Any other blasts you would like to blast me on?

@xetsr We've done business on my other accounts and I look forward to doing more business with you in the future. You always have been a good fellow gambler, I know you use BTC simply for gambling just as I once did (and still do occasionally as mentioned). If you are ever in D.C. please message me and I will buy you lunch at Union Station. We can talk about everything and all and make peace. Even if not, hey you got a free lunch!

@bitcoindistributor I really do feel for you, if you want an account just let me know, I got a couple. Or create a new account and buy from quickseller, that'd be some funny shit.

@everyone If anyone has an account on default trust wanting to sell, I'll pay $1000 in BTC at time of trade, just message me. The funds would be held in escrow for 30 days until you have proved you would not rat out the account bought. Thanks for your time all.

Having dealt with both Xestr and QS I can tell you 100% they are not the same person...

Let me guess - we have only your word on this?

The same word that guaranteed I would be put in the hospital on my last trip south?   ::)

Your word means nothing, addict.

LOL. I can tell you that it is very unlikely that you just so happened to get a "text" from your "friend" about this.

I can tell you that the "bar" is not the default setting for macs from 2010-2012 as the default color for the "bar" is gray.

I do not give a shit about your sex life or why you have taken various drugs. My advice to you is to simply get help. I am not trying to call you out or shame you. Your account was given negative trust in order to warn others when potentially dealing with you.


lol

And I'm sure you'll keep making me laugh with your blasts. The reason you guys hate me so much isn't cause I'm a scammer (which I'm not, I still 100% argue I owe BigBitz nothing and never took a loan) but more the fact that I have confidence in myself unlike u guys. I have a life outside this pathetic forum and that gets you guys fired up which is cute. If I wasn't so outspoken no one would get hurt from "I believe it's him!" Reps like this poor chap just recd from quickseller. It's pretty pathetic all in all. I'm actually surprised tho vod it looks like u haven't red reposed the guy, what a shock! Why not man why haven't u red repped him??

Shocker but I think Vod is actually being a decent person and not making accusations without evidence like QS has stooped so low to go.

I hate you so much because you are a liar, overall a scammer, and you threatened to kill me.   :-\

I'm OK if you call me biased...

Well per BadBear, the OP is a probable alt of KoS so it seems that at least one person agrees with me ;)

https://i.imgur.com/Iipx1lY.png
 :D

Probably too late to the party, but I also saw the post that was deleted by BitcoinDistributor. They are definitely the same person. I'm pretty sure it was something about March Madness brackets

I'm pretty sure he was just trying to make a point. The difference is the post that was made by KoS, deleted and made again by his alt is they were the SAME EXACT post. This happened within minutes, I just happened to be browsing that thread at the right time.

Scams like this will easily be identified with the new forum, since it will record all edits and deletions for public use.

Xetsr enough with your detective work where do u live mate in US? I'll see if I can get a meeting set up so we can out to lunch sometime!

Quickseller and Vod will die soon enough.

Thank you blazed out for providing me with the drop address u sent quickseller's coin to.

I probably have another 30 years or so.  I already survived your best assassination attempt - I'm not worried about your word.   :P

And I'm done feeding the obvious troll.  

I am not even going to ask blazedout if it is true because I know it is not.

Regardless, if anything were to happen to me then the fact that you are making death threads is now public information so even if you had nothing to do with it, you would be a suspect and likely would be put on trial for murder

Really? That would be fantastic! Can you link me the 'post' when it is write this thing? Thanks.

---

For the OP, you are probable an alt of that scammer. The negative trust from BadBear is almost 100% secure (I think because he owns some valid proofs that we don't know).

Really? That would be fantastic! Can you link me the 'post' when it is write this thing? Thanks.

---

[/quote]

Ugh.  No way I could dig it up.  Maybe you could ask outside a thread like this where more people will see the question and someone could answer it for you.  :)

Don't you people realise the more you all squabble like this in public and constantly throw accusations at each other the less likely everybody else is to trust any of you? Forget the people you're all picking fights with all of this just makes you look incredibly petty and it will make people wary of doing any business deals with you if that's the kind of attitude you have in general.

I'm all for ousting scammers and calling people out on dodgy behaviour but this shit must have been going on for months now not just a couple of weeks and it's getting boring seeing you all clog up meta with your shit posts.

Suggest IGNORE is a good thing to use in that case. Mr. Quickseller is certainly not going anywhere and is more than capable of stirring the pot for many more months and roping more people in. It is escalating.

It certainly is. It would certainly help if the proofs would be collected in a post (e.g. in scam accu) and refered to in the rating. If evidence is strong enough this would also remove most of the bickering and drama.

It would also help if those accused would not hijack several other threads in an attempt to make them look an even bigger fool.

If a scam accusation was opened every time quickseller or tomatocage left negative trust for someone then we would need a separate sub for each of them.

I don't think presenting a lot of evidence that someone is a scammer (or an alt of a scammer) would stop the bickering and drama. It would just give scammers additional information as to how they are caught and what to do to avoid detection. Even when evidence is provided that is solid, scammers still deny the allegations, take a look at what was quoted here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1038343.msg11215151#msg11215151) (or look at reply #8 in the archive (https://archive.is/vVsIH)). I think as long as people like quickseller and tomatocage maintain their reputation by being in possession of evidence of a scam prior to leaving negative trust, and removing negative trust when additional information comes to light, posting a scam accusation is really not necessary IMO. Scammers are going to do anything they can to try to intimidate others into removing negative trust (see the number of death threats made by KoS as an example).

The intimidation and trolling does work against a lot of people. For example, look at how much tspacepilot trolls those who left him negative trust (both TF and quickseller), look at how many people have left him negative trust, and then look at how many people have excluded them from their trust network (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1062052.msg11393696#msg11393696). You can make your own conclusions.  

It should also be noted that the OP was not asking for proof to be presented, he was asking that negative trust either be removed or that the quickseller account be removed from DefaultTrust (network)

Here I will state it publicly to keep it fair...


Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Northwest, Washington, DC 20500

Deliver notes: Oval Office - Leave on desk

Proof of what? Proof that he is another user? How exactly does one prove that? Oh that's right by Badbear claiming he has some magic formula that says 2 usernames are the same person, but he can't share the information because it is a matter of forum national security.  That seems like a worthwhile request.  ::)

P.S. Quickseller the fact that you are here arguing for yourself using your alt says volumes about you.

Proof that he is an alt of KoS. There are plenty of ways that you can prove that an account is an alt of another person, the most solid way is to use blockchain evidence, however I think xeter did a pretty good job in this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1063011.msg11397373#msg11397373) post. BadBear obviously has access to additional information that is not public (eg IP addresses, browser fingerprinting), however if he were to reveal his exact methods then scammers could use that information to avoid detection. Can you give any examples of BadBear being incorrect about alt accounts?
I don't think I am arguing for myself, and it is a well known fact that ACCTseller=quickseller, therefore posting from this account does not amount to shilling

Whatever you need to tell yourself...

I like the 3rd person twist.


This sounds like we are some sort of shadow tribunal. If there is evidence it should be presented. If it helps scammers to improve their skills in avoding detection thats the pill we have to swallow. There are certainly exceptions that are acceptable, the newbie asking for loan w/o collateral, the obviously carded gift cards, the ToS violation of MS keys. They have been discussed at length and there has been some sort of consensus among the commuity that these ratings are justified or at least the reasoning behind them can easily be understood. That at least is my impression judging by the threads that pop up in meta.

Besides. The example you gave has a measly 16 posts, there is little drama and next to no bickering. This is exactly what I was hinting at. Everytime there is an accusation without proper proof we have a 3 day dramathon in meta over a multitude of threads. The only thing this does is to lower the trust in those on DT. This is as much a political tool as it is a jurisdictional. If the overal impression is that DT is misused and judged without evidence or without evidence the "regular" user can refer to it is of no use. If the evidence is withheld to the public the rating can not be judged and thus will be considered worthless.

makes my point -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1038343.msg11215151#msg11215151

I am very impressed by the work you do and I value it, but if you dont make your findings public it results in the view people have of you now. If you have something extra, keep it for later if you want, but there should be a minimum to hold you accountable.


The title and thread are very clear in my opinion. There is no reason to insult your intelligence here.

I think having a history of being fair with your trust. If you have a history of being right about these kinds of things then the community will believe your trust ratings. If you have a history of being unfair with trust ratings then your trust ratings will be ignored. If someone has a history of being right about figuring out alts of scammers, then when they say that someone is an alt of a scammer, then their word will be believed. A negative rating is not a criminal punishment, and as a result it does not need to have the same protections that a criminal courtroom would provide. A negative trust rating is to provide a warning to others to trade with extreme caution and to alert their potential trading partners to take precautions when dealing with them. The primary effect of a negative rating is that it makes it more difficult for them to scam in the future.

Giving ways for scammers to avoid detection means that scammers will have an easier time pulling off their scams.

Besides. The example you gave has a measly 16 posts, there is little drama and next to no bickering. This is exactly what I was hinting at. Everytime there is an accusation without proper proof we have a 3 day dramathon in meta over a multitude of threads. The only thing this does is to lower the trust in those on DT. This is as much a political tool as it is a jurisdictional. If the overal impression is that DT is misused and judged without evidence or without evidence the "regular" user can refer to it is of no use. If the evidence is withheld to the public the rating can not be judged and thus will be considered worthless. [/quote]The example did not have additional drama in that specific thread, however I believe there was additional drama in other threads after that post (he had deleted his posts so there is nothing to point to specifically.
I think it also makes my point. After presenting my proof that they were the same person, additional precautions were taken to cover his tracks. After seeing that his bc.i wallet was leaking the identity of his alts, he started using bitstamp and bitdice.me as his "wallet", leaving significantly less evidence then would otherwise be expected.
Evidence was presented on replies 2 and 3 of this thread (xeter and I both posted the same evidence, and I posted it shortly after he did, so I deleted the post to avoid posting essentially the exact same thing).
I didn't post the evidence, but my allegation was still true. Asking for evidence when you are guilty of something is trying to get off on a technicality. As I mentioned previously, negative trust is not a criminal punishment, but is rather a warning to others

OP received a valid negative feedback from Badbear which is the only feedback anyone should consider bearing in mind that Badbear is the admin. Rest those who left negative feedback don't have any proof/evidence and hence their feedback doesn't make sense.

I don't get if one has already received a negative feedback from the admin or a default trust member, why do other members too join the league? Does it improve or make his trust rating more valuable or trustworthy? I don't think so and find it weird ways of entering the default trust system.

If only one user left negative and he/she is removed from default trust list, negative rating will change to neutral rating. So to avoid it, two or more or DF users leave feedback.

The same arguement could be applied to positive trust received. Just because you have been trustworthy in the past does not make you trustworthy now. Its the DT equivalent of the long con.


Its not in a sense that you lock someone up, but it is in a sense that you can make it very difficult for someone to trade with others here. Its very close to a fine. This is esp. true for older accounts. A newbie account is quickly replaced, an established (as in high rank) account is not.


Yes. Hiding evidence of their scams means that you undermine the trust system and over time rending it useless. Any scammer can get enough information about how to hide their tracks without you revealing their idiocity. If the trust in the current system is destroyed it is useless and can not easily be replaced.


Next step will be mixers if it turns out bitstamp rats them out for a court order. Dark wallet. Anonymous focused alt coins. There are plenty options. Increasing the workload for scammers is a good thing.


No asking for evidence is the only way to defend yourself. It is impossible to proof that you did not do something. It is however possible to show error in your chain of evidence.


BadBear might be the only acceptable exception here. If they draw a connection based on personal information like IP addresses it certainly makes sense to keep the personal information private. It is also different from a dox as the IP is typcially not publicly available. The interesting question is whether BadBear has information at all or just followed the rating by someone else.
Be that as it may my point is not this specific or any other specific case, but the tendency to leave a rating without ref link or accountable arguments.

BB has a lot at stake with his reputation here, as I do.  I don't think he would "follow" anyone else's rating.

I, however, have enough trust in him to follow his ratings.

I personally also have no problem in trusting Quicksellers (or BB's) judgement either. Im certain neither of them, nor you, are leaving negative ratings lightheartedly or at a whim. Disclosure is still important to maintain the integrity of the rating system or rather of the default trust list as a tool.

OK but in this case Badbear may not be removed from the default trust list so here the other negative ratings don't make sense.


Yeah true. Only Badbear can find a connection with the IP addresses and not the others who have left him negative just based on Badbear's trusted feedback as they have no evidence to present here. To me it just appears as trust abuse.

I'm guilty of being one who left negative feedback based on BB's ability to look at IP addresses.

The OP has sent me many death threats.  So IMHO it's important for new users to see that scum get more that a simple -6.  That scum has done much more than scam.

If I knew who he was and where he lived, he'd get Alberta Justice from me.   He probably wouldn't so quick to throw out death threats after that.   :)

Vod is a bad-pathetic person.

Mmm i can kill this forum, i am a master doing DoS/DDoS attacks  8)

This is a stupid forum, this is not like google/facebook.

Plus i have better things...

Vod live your life.

So then why do you keep coming back?  Good luck on your other projects my friend. 

QS left negative feedback before BadBear left and also once you strongly believe a user is scammer, you can leave negative feedback. Leaving more than one feedback will also help in preventing negative trust rating to be a neutral rating.

Oh damn! I am sorry but I dint know that. He's a psycho.


OK. The trust system doesn't show the time and all show the same date. Also, QS dint give any reference nor evidence so his feedback unlike the user railzand who left him feedback claiming the same with a reference to a post that has been deleted. Preventing from a neutral rating is definitely a good idea but there are less chances that a scammer can get positives from a default trust member (which is the case with the OP). If I believe a person is a scammer for sure, I'll leave him negative feedback (but that's not when others leave him feedback and then I negate him).

In this case, the OP does seem suspicious as he hasn't only received feedback from Badbear but from others who have made such claims 4 months back.

Well people that have large amounts of trust often do not need to use escrow and others are willing to send first without hesitation.
maybe. However overall the decision to leave feedback is based on your judgement.
I disagree. If you have a reputation of successfully outing scams then others will eventually stop looking at the evidence and taking your word. I see little reason to create a thread few people will bother to read when the rating is taken on its face. If a conclusion is disputed then evidence can be provided to support such conclusion.
It would create more work for scammers but it would also make detection more difficult, potentially to the point where it is not possible.
This assumes that the accused thinks it makes sense to defend themselves. If someone is called out as a scammer, and knows they scammed then they might not even bother trying to defend themselves. Obviously we sometimes get people like the OP who know they are guilty and want to create a bunch of drama anyway.

---

My point is, that if someone has a reputation of accurately outing scammers then the scammer will not bother to ask for proof because he knows it can be provided. As what happened in this case, if proof is requested then it can be provided (it was quickly provided when asked for by the OP).

Also not all deals are done openly via threads. It is not uncommon for a deal to be done entirely via PM when one person sees a post indicating that they have something for sale/want to buy something (for example person B posting on person A's thread offering to buy a widget, then person C can PM person B to try to work out a deal if A and B cannot reach a deal.

I think we just have to agree to disagree here. I value your input because it is well researched not because it comes from a certain account. Maybe I am the minority here that does not make the standards less important.

If it is like you say that building a reputation to leave an accurate rating is enough than it is exactly like the long con with trades. If any dispute will just be seen as a scammer causing drama and no evidence is requested or vetted a position on DT can easily be exploited.

Well evidence will be provided once it is requested from the person who receives the negative feedback (or anyone else who questions it).

When someone is an alt of a scammer then they know they are an alt, although they likely think they did a good job of covering up this fact. When KoS opened this thread he knew that he was KoS, he was bluffing in saying that I did not have any evidence.

Ironically, it was because I was trolled by him in my 'use escrow' thread in currency exchange that I received a tip via PM with evidence to support that the OP is KoS, and it checked out.