You are correct, my name is not copyrighted (nor trademarked as a trademark would actually be more likely), however my handle does have a certain level of trust and credibility associated with it.

For clairification I am not associated with the OP. (Despite the similarities between my handle and the thread title).

My price works out to $1.74 worth of Bitcoin. I don't think that is very expensive, especially considering that giving a firm activity amount the account can reach will likely allow the account to sell for a higher then otherwise price.

I would be able to do it. I would charge .0075 btc per account or if you want me to count potential activity plus escrow the transfer of the account I would charge a total of .0125 btc. 

People have scammed for this little in the past (granted BTC was trading higher then it is not, but the point still remains) so even this much would probably be too much to a newbie loan scammer

Your addresses are not those of an exchange. I sent you a list of addresses that are likely part of the wallet file none of which are associated with an exchange; Blazr did a much more in-depbth analysis of each of the addresses giving additional evidence that they are not exchange addresses.

Furthermore, you opened up a scam accusation against Ume at most two hours prior to contacting him to buy the account. This means one of two things, one - you faked the sale in order to attempt to protect the trust rating of your account, or more likely, two - opened the scam accusation in order to put pressure on Ume to sell any account he had in his possession cheaply, which according to your screenshots you were able to do. Regardless it is more then appropriate to let the negative trust remain on the account.

Well as it stands now with a default depth of "2" only 12 people need to be especially villigant with their trust list and those 12 people are generally very active in the forum and can easily be contacted if there are problems with their trust list.

If we were to expand the default trust debpth to "3" then there would be the potential that someone will not be active or would be taking a break from the forum when someone on their list turns scammer. (There are hundreds of people on level 2 default trust). This would also involve a lot more coordination with a much larger group of people turn scammer. Additionally it would be more difficult to mediate and resolve trust related disputes because of the much larger number of people having influence over the ratings that people see by default, many of which probably don't understand who is generally appropriate to be on their trust list as the trust system is very complex.

Additionally anyone who feels that debpth of "3" or "4" is more appropriate or "better" then "2" is able to make this change. The "2" setting is only the default.

I can vouch that this is a scam and that the OP is simply trying to launder money via Starbucks cards acquired via carded credit cards

He sent them to me. I am escrow for the signature campaign contest.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1030340.msg11139547#msg11139547

But yea the OP needs several lessons on how to protect his money and how to maintain his reputation.

Expanding your trust list out to level 4 means that a lot of scammers will stay in your trust network which means that their alts will possible have positive trust. The scammers will also have the ability to make it easier to give people negative trust that probably shouldn't have negative trust (just look at how many people woodcollector and his alts have given negative trust to, and I think he is (or at least was) in level 3 or 4 default trust (which is the case with a lot of other scammers)

You should really use escrow with him. Otherwise there is a near 100% chance one of you will get scammed.

The last I heard it should be released "early 2015" although we are already past that. I believe most/some of the code is available on github so it is a good ways there now.

If I were to guess then I would say it will probably be available for everyone to use as bitcointalk around 4-6 months from now or so (although I have zero inside knowledge about the progress)

No. Moreia did not fall for it. This should have been fairly evident in the post you quoted

Why don't you sign a message from that address? You had spent funds from another address when you paid goose20 earlier today

I tried to get moreia (the OP) into thinking I wanted to start a ponzi with him in order to build trust with him so he would give up the identity of his alleged default trust account. I was not able to build up enough trust :/

I was asked to provide escrow services for this contest. I have provided the OP with an escrow address and will update this post once funds have been received.

Edit: funds received.

 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This is quickseller from Bitcoin talk.

This is in reference to the signature competition for the below thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1036213.0

The escrow address is as follows: 1BeNmFv1MFjXW9iPuu5ECLXRr4fRS1Uro1

As long as funds are in escrow it is safe to participate in the signature contest.

YoBit will choose a winner at the time of his choice at which point the winner should post the BB codes to the signatures he submitted. Once YoBit confirms receipt of the BB codes he should authorize the release of the escrow at which point I will release funds in escrow to the address of the winners choice (minus my fee).

I understand the winning amount to be.25 btc

Thanks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEVAwUBVTk7UVMt0pDwvrUWAQIl9QgAogOA5Y9A81gNtecvBeLEF7T0xhVfLvsz
9l0lmlsPVWkT18j1PyUj/lLV3IFNmZmz91Be1OlURjZYmQJfO8lKIWPQhKt4ipoQ
1RCAHz7qeHB/h86M06shjs/KgAqp0Dfs3fiPCyqqfjHr8tjxYu6PQQuod0xH4d/Q
jcqnF/mtn5WEZJXFitJwhX7mcR+DayFy4GjOLjaPEzMflxn/YmJLBzIm/pSM9EEj
nUyFRptTdkFQBZ0XmCdDHexe0vWbQ/iLdDEgQQ9RLHCcv2yB8Wap0Yc7MXMj34EF
CTtuhWz+ReyeGJ0b6HeWmlACRwVZCmOcriUOMS2fCJGzWkva6qSi/w==
=nnwi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

If you can get money to Australia then you can try the below thread.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1035970.0

You should def use escrow with him though.

He has negative trust. The only thing (except the hopes of pulling a confidence scam) compelling someone to repay a no collateral loan is the threat/fear of getting negative trust when they scam. If they have negative trust already then they have no reason to repay their loan.

Saying that payments are automatically does not make it so. You will gain a significant amount if confidence if you utilize a trusted forum member to handle payments for participants, they would obviously not be automated however it would be much more certain that they will receive payment in exchange for the service they provide you (signature advertising).

Just wanted to let you know that your rates are a bit on the low side, especially for full members and members.

I'd also strongly suggest that you accept escrow otherwise you would have difficulty attracting very many participants due to the lack of trust.