you may have not said it is positive EV however that is the only way you can reliably make money on a dice site, otherwise with as much as you have claimed to have gambled you would have almost certainly have lost money, not be up 25 btc as you claim. The only other "explanation" is either gamblers fallacy or you somehow were cheating.

You have a history of sending out malware so I only assumed that your ultimate plan was to send malware.

---

well for those of us who don't routinely devolop/use/run ponzi sites, some of us don't know where to look to find how much they claim to have invested in their site. Plus I think it is fair to say that the sites numbers are BS which is something you have a history of.

Who said it has 8 BTC invested? The OP says there is 15+ BTC

I guess we were trying to reel eachother in, with it working for neither of us lol. I am fairly sure that you would have tried sending me malware with promises of Ev positive gambling strategy which is mathematically impossible if you are using a provably fair gambling site.

Like I said, I'm sorry you weren't able to scam more from your new site prior to calling it out as an obvious scam.

I've never publicly stated we are the same person, the only people that made the claim publicly were trying to cause me problems so I wanted to make them look like an idiot. Plenty of people are aware though.

I'm not sure what the point of this is if that site really isn't yours

Okay I know I told you that I am ACCTSeller so there is no point in denying that lol. It is a pretty well known fact anyway.

You used a copy of your last site haha.

Either way, sorry for calling out your scam so soon after you started it. Better luck next time

Like I said in the thread that he opened on me, I don't think he is ever going to get caught scamming in the future because he has learned his lesson on how to avoid getting caught and displays a tendency to dispute any claim of him scamming even though the evidence again him is clear.

Oh yea. I was trying to build up trust to find the default trust account that you claim to have. Didn't work though.

I think it is pretty clear that I was right about investcryptos is your though.  

I looked into your claim that you have received 15 btc worth of investments and you are short. Additionally I am fairly certain that a good number of your investments received were from you -just look at other ponzis and you will see how much money other ponzis have recently received in their first 24 hours verses what your site has received.

I can also say on good authority that you are in fact one and the same of moreia

It seems that people seem to distrust TF so much that they just outright ignore his claims without even looking into them. The coinlenders and inputs "hacks" took place very shortly after this took place, at which point TF was likely preoccupied with dealing with that and could not even bring additional attention to this scam.

Since TF turned scammer, he pointed out a number of scams/scandals that everyone promptly ignored. There was the silvercane ponzi that for some reason scammed him first and the community ignored him and then ended up getting scammed. When dicebitco.in scammed, he advocated that people remove their signature and many people promptly ignored him, some people appeared to do the opposite for the sake of not listening to him. I want to say there are more examples but cannot think of them off the top of my head.

From what I can tell people were not leaving negative trust against people when they were discovered to scam verses the 4-5 negatives that people would generally receive today when they are discovered to scam. Plus you can add the fact that no scam accusation was ever opened and TF was on default trust at the time. Not only that but he was a newbie/junior member at the time this happened so it was likely assumed that the account would get abandoned once this came to light (and likely was abandoned until TF was removed from default trust).

Your account has negative trust from b!z so it is not going to be of very much value. As explained above lending with PayPal is not any more safe then lending with bitcoin. The only way that you can win a chargeback with paypal is if you are buying a physical item or your account is hacked, therefore someone would need to be dishonest with paypal in order to win a chargeback against your account.

You also posted this loan request in the wrong forum. You posted in bitcointalk.org, it belongs in paypaltalk.org

Are you complaining that someone did not tip you for something LOL.

First of all, the both of you are almost certainly selling accounts that were ultimately either hacked or purchased with stolen credit cards (or will otherwise stop working in the near future).

Secondly, if he is selling at a higher price then it should put you at an advantage because your prices are more competitive. If a potential customer knows they are getting the same product from the same ultimate source, a free market will dictate that they will go to the cheaper source (assuming all else is equal)

Signature verified, although it did not contain the date, it did contain the unique URL of this thread so that should be close enough to the date IMO. A lender may wish to take additional precautions since that address was compromised, or they make take it at face value, IDK.

I personally don't give out no collateral loans except in the most exceptional cases when someone has extremely high level of reputation, and wouldn't be able to lend to you without some kind of collateral that would cover the loan amount plus interest

Signing a message from that address would prove something. It would show that you either have access to the private key because you personally generated it via blockchain.info or someone was able to calculate it's private key (which only a generally small number of people probably have the expertise to actually do).

I sent you a PM

---

I haven't received any kind of response from killyou72, so I assume he is no longer interested. 

Edit: removed bump verbiage. The above statement is still relevant and should not be deleted.

---

Auctioning MS-68 1 BTC Silver + Gold coin --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1057087.new#new

---

Auctioning MS-67 1 BTC Silver + Gold coin --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1088245.0

[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]

If order to reverse a PayPal transaction, you will need to either lie about your account getting hacked or lie about you buying a physical item. Alternatively you can simply use stolen funds to buy bitcoin and by default, the funds will get reversed.

The problem is that when you are dealing with scammers, they will have no problem with lying about the terms of the transaction. On the other hand you are not going to be able to get the payment reversed if you are honest.

tl;dr - don't use paypal to trade bitcoin

Different terms were agreed to

From a forum rule point of view, I know that dox's can only be posted if information was discovered from public sources, however the rule above does not mention a public source exception, it does however say that it is acceptable to post it in the course of an investigation of a scam accusation. From a forum rule point of view, I really can't say if using a public source is allowable or not when posting restricted information.

From a "is this a good idea" point of view, I know that most attorneys will advise their clients not to discuss pending litigation nor the people they are in pending litigation with anyone besides their attorney, publicly or privately. I would say that it is likely that no harm will untimely come of it if Bruno were to post Josh's SSN with a source referenced however it will probably also cause him (or his lawyer) a headache.

Bruno had mentioned that the picture were gotten from some public source, and I have no reason not to believe him, so I really don't see what the problem is. IMO the litigation is probably just a way of showing the FTC that he is willing to litigate over small things in the hopes that the FTC lets him off easy and/or makes a slap-on-the-wrist type offer to settle.

Edit: thanks on the warning about quoting restricted information. I edited/redacted the quote

I agree that he probably is joking regarding that string of numbers/letters being Josh's SSN, however it is probably still not a good idea to say that it is his SSN (or say that you will sell the key to determine what the SSN is) because anything that happens as a result of it will be a headache for Bruno at best. This is especially true if Bruno is actually facing some kind of litigation regarding a picture he posted years ago (I am not sure if he is joking about this or not)

LOL.

I can't speak for theymos, however I would say a good rule of thumb would be that if an arbitrary third party (with medium to high technical/mathematical knowledge/abilities) would reasonably be able to convert what you posted to a piece of restricted information (a SSN, account number, Unique Identification number, PIN, ect.) then it is probably not allowed.

I would also say that it is probably not a good idea to advertise that you are posting something that can be converted back to a third-parties piece of restricted information, as it will likely attract unwanted attention towards both you and the forum

It looks like the bot may have mistakenly paid me when it shouldn't have. If you want me to return the funds then please post an address you want me to send the funds to, otherwise we can just apply it to the amount you will owe me at the end of the month. Either way please sign a message from 16pe2twTgrjKC8mioPjX3f2UbCMGvWbVz4 so I know for sure that it was you/the campaign that actually sent the funds.

---

Also there is a typo in the message the bot sends when it makes payments. "Enroll" actually has two l's not one.