Using a custom trust list allows me to expand my trust network. People on my trust list are people whose opinions I trust and who I trust to maintain a trust list whose trust ratings are sound.  They are not necessarily people who I would trust with my money or who I would send money or goods to first without escrow, although for the most part they are.

.2 is much too low for a senior account. If they are selling for that little then they are either despite for money or it has very low quality posts or more likely both.

IMO .6 is pretty cheap for a hero. Although I don't think it will sell for much above .6 if it is only a low level hero.

He has insane amounts of negative trust. The fact that he is a scammer is old news and anyone selling to him is stupid to send him money before receiving any kind of goods/whatever you are buying.

The fact that he is from/lives in India (I think he actually lives in Canada) has nothing to do with anything.

I use a custom trust list. Any feedback that I left for dev will show up for you by default because I am in badbears list. The reason that his score is higher from my point of view is because more people have left positive trust to dev that are in my trust network then are in default trust network.

You don't happen to be an alt of BiPolarBob do you? The both of you appear to be acting in very similar ways

As mentioned above .13 is much too low for a senior account. You can earn that much from making only 100 posts in one week in the da dice sig deal (not even counting bonuses). Generally speaking a fair price for an account is something that would allow you to ROI after roughly a month and by making between 300 and 500 posts, although the forces of supply and demand will often distort those prices.

I have personally never sold a neutral trust senior for less then ~.33 in the past and even that was a very low price. I think some people might be willing to sell for a little less then that, however .13 is closer to the value of a full member account

Well either way, I think it is safe to I am very satisfied with my purchase. A bunch of MS-67's and a 68 is not exactly something to complain about

He wants to be able to send email to the people who are behind the email addresses (with either spam or malware). Your solution would make it so the OP would be sending emails to himself.

His trust looks pretty green to me.

Being on level 2 (or even level 1) of the default trust network has nothing to do with the color of your trust rating, it only has to do with if your feedback is visible to others by default

You were previously on CanaryInTheMine's trust list and shortly after he was removed entirely, I noticed that you had been added to escrow.ms's list. A few weeks ago you were removed from escrow.ms's list along with several other people.

You would need to discuss with escrow.ms the reason behind your removal.

edit:

lol

I am not interested in buying any accounts and I am certainly not interested in buying a banned account.

I personally find your explanation hard to believe and think there is a good chance that the account gets further banned in the future because of ban evasion

If you say so. How did you come into possession of the account?

Check the auction section. It is littered with worthless domains that people are selling for next to nothing

If the account is banned currently then it would be possible that your Digitalpawn account get banned in the middle of a trade if a global moderator were to discover that you are evading your ban. This would mean that even if you wish to provide the account details to the buyer you may be unable to do so because of your ban evasion ban

The way you can mitigate risk to be low enough for it to be NPV positive over the long run is to get the buyer and seller to agree on specific details that the account being traded will meet (e.g. created date, min number of posts, min number of activity, trust, quality of posts, being able to sign a message from an old BTC/GPG key posted with the account). Once that is agreed to then the buyer should send funds to the escrow, and once funds are confirmed by the escrow the seller should provide the account name and password to the escrow only, the escrow should change the password/email/ect. and confirm the account being traded matches the description that both parties agreed upon. Once the account details have been verified, then the escrow should provide the changed password and name to the buyer only who has an opportunity to further inspect the account and authorize the release of escrow funds. If the buyer disputes something about the account then he can remain in possession of the account while a dispute is being mediated (and remain responsible for any malice), however unless the escrow makes a mistake, any dispute should be very cut and dry. In the event that the seller either provides an account that does not match the agreed upon description then the escrow would change the password back to what the seller provided and reject the account.

This would avoid the escrow from ever needing to potentially make a false statement they would be held accountable for, and would equally protect the buyer and seller. It would also result in the escrow being in control of the account for as little time as possible and would minimize the time that more then one party knows the password to the account which would minimize the chance that there could be a question as to if the escrow did something malicious while he was in control of the account.

lol.

You don't however the fact that you are using a certain person for escrow means that you can assume that each party trusts the escrow service, if the parties do not trust the escrow then they should not be using them as escrow. The opposite is true for each respective trading party as well. The fact that each trading party is using escrow means that there is not mutual trust.

When you are using escrow it generally means two things:

• Both parties trust the escrow
• Both parties are not able to trust eachother

You have no way of knowing if the account named by the seller is actually owned by the seller, or even if it is, you have no way of knowing that the seller will actually provide the password to the account once escrow is funded. That method puts the escrow at risk.

 The whole batch grades exceptionally well. Out of the 9 that I sent, one lealana scored a ms-68 and one casascias scored a ms-66 

It looks like he confirmed twice that he was wanting to trade at the market rate. The OP also said that he wanted to trade "1.1" which I would take to mean 1 to 1 or another way of saying the market price.

It seems that kanshish948 was likely sent more Bitcoin then he was able to pay for. This was probably due to a communication mistake on the OP's end. Assuming the above PM's can be validated (I really can't check the video right now) then kashish948 should refund the difference between what he was sent verses how much PayPal was actually sent to the OP.

Damm. I just got an email from Anacs saying that one of the lealana coins that I sent for grading got a ms68 and I was hoping that mine was at least tied for having the highest grade.