How much can you offer for 0.0366 BTC via NEFT/IMPS?
527 rupees (14400 rate) Nice to see an INR buy/sell thread. Its good to use an escrow service for direct trading. I'd prefer www.100bit.co.in. Why a website as an escrow? There are trusted escrows here as well and I'll use MZ as an escrow if required. |
|
|
|
How much can you offer for 0.0366 BTC via NEFT/IMPS?
527 rupees (14400 rate) INR 542 for 0.0366 BTC (Rate as per preev.com). Let me know if you are OK and interested in the exchange. |
|
|
|
|
Bitgold is a trusted website and I've known people who have managed to redeem sucessfully. They rejected my ID card recently as they require a passport or another national ID card for verification. Their customer support is responsive which proves they are reliable.
|
|
|
|
|
I have 0.0366 BTC and I need $9.42 in PM. Let me know if you are interested in the exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
How much can you offer for 0.0366 BTC via NEFT/IMPS?
|
|
|
|
|
I have 0.0366 BTC for sale. I need $1 + BTC rate as per preev.com (If $234.1 = 1 BTC, I need $9.56 for 0.0366 BTC) via PM/OKPay for the same.
Buyer needs to go first/escrow will be used.
BTC sold
|
|
|
|
-snip-
Avoid detection? How do scammers get tracked by DT members then? If legitimate users want to leave the forum, their wish. No legitimate user would get scared unless they wanted to scam and couldn't do so.
You contradict your own statements that what job DT members are doing, the forum admin/mods cannot do it when the case is that the forum mods/admins don't want to do it.
Members analyse taints and link alts(if any) with it. They already doing it and leaving negative trust feedback. All staffs in this forum may not know how to analyse taints and they don't have access to IP address and such except admins. BadBear is already leaving negative trust feedback to alts of scammers. This is enough. If it is not, can you tell me a way to find alts of scammers when they use VPNs and Tor? Almost all scammers don't use same IP which they use for another account. Scammers may not use the same IP but I guess it's possible to detect a member who has created an account using a proxy.
Known scammers' accounts are already marked with negative feedbacks. If they are banned, they will come with a new clean account and can easily scam others. When we ban them, they are *forced* to create new accounts but now, they are not and it chances are less for them to come under alts than when we ban them. This only decrease scams. Banning scammers also create a false sense in inexperienced users that "there are no scams here because they are moderated". Only way to reduce scammers is to enforce "1 account per person" rule which is impossible.
@bold: Then really it is impossible to stop scammers from scamming members here and it makes no sense for DT members to do that job which is not their responsibility. DT members too keep changing their negative trust to neutral when they are under pressure to maintain their DT status which means they are abusing their power. One DT member admitted to leaving ratings that are not accurate and 50% of his ratings are an abuse. Do we really need such members to track scammers when their ratings cannot be trusted? What's the point? If common members of a forum are given a moderating job to track scammers when it should be a job of the admin/real mods, that's when we can see that the forum is not functioning properly and there is no proper law and order. |
|
|
|
I am not concerned about the number of people on the DefaultTrust list. I am concerned about the lack of people on DefaultTrust list being unwilling to leave negative trust when it should be left.
It is not realistic for moderators to moderate scams because it is impossible to tell when something is a scam or not with 100% certainty, and attempting to do so would cause many people being prevented from trading who are simply uneducated as to how to trade on here, and if my research of you is correct, this would apply to you prior to you accepting escrow services. This would be the bad of all worlds because scammers would learn how to avoid detection of moderators and slightly change their practices, and legitimate users would simply abondon bitcoin when they make small mistakes in how they try to trade with others.
I may propose some kind of system where members of the DefaultTrust list can vote, anon, if someone deserves an anon negative rating, and if so then the person should be awareded an anon negative rating that can only be removed with the vote of even more members of the DefaultTrust list. Maybe someone can receive such a "super rating" if three people vote for such a rating, and such a rating can only be removed if 130% of the number of people who voted for such a rating voted to have it removed.
I don't get you as one time you say DT members can track scammers and next time you say it's not realistic to moderate a scam? So just the way DT members can track scams, moderators can't or they don't want to? I don't believe to have certain members of this forum to go about policing when it's the job of the forum moderator. It may make their work difficult but it should be their work and if they don't want to do it, then it's fine. By saying that catching a scam is not realistic or it can't happen then sorry to say as having a DT list also is not realistic to make some members capable enough to track scammers. I am not asking to ban the scammers, but give them warnings at least. I am on another forum too and there moderators easily track scammers and ban them if they continue to scam even after 2 warnings. @bold: What does that mean? I am definitely not uneducated on how to trade here and if I was, I would not manage to sell so many gift cards as I have done till date. @blue: Avoid detection? How do scammers get tracked by DT members then? If legitimate users want to leave the forum, their wish. No legitimate user would get scared unless they wanted to scam and couldn't do so. You contradict your own statements that what job DT members are doing, the forum admin/mods cannot do it when the case is that the forum mods/admins don't want to do it. |
|
|
|
22 days 19 hours. My account is 2 years old and still my login time is in days  |
|
|
|
So now the time has come when people have stop robbing real cash, ornaments and now believe in robbing bitcoins? Now a thief will not ask me for my banking password but instead will ask me for my bitcoin wallet password. The buyer was so foolish to plan such a big theft for such a small amount and the seller was foolish to enter his car and sell bitcoins. The buyer was rich enough to own a car and he robbed $1100? What if the seller had nothing in his bitcoin wallet and had to be a cheat himself?
The thieves were not after his Bitcoin. The potential seller lost some $8,500 in fiat cash, another $3,500 in Bitcoins, his Credit Card (and its PIN number), as well as his new Samsung mobile phone. The thieves were not idiots. They had planned this operation long back, and the indications are that they carefully screened their victim and selected some one who was the most vulnerable. And where did you read about it? The article does not mention about it. The seller of the bitcoins seems to have just cashed out some money from the bank as no common man would carry so much cash and the thieves would not know about it unless they have been following him for a long time. I doubt that they contacted him via craigslist then as they wouldn't contact an unknown person and be sure that the seller is the same person. Credit card can be cancelled too and if it's tracked the thieves can be easily traced. |
|
|
|
|
So now the time has come when people have stop robbing real cash, ornaments and now believe in robbing bitcoins? Now a thief will not ask me for my banking password but instead will ask me for my bitcoin wallet password. The buyer was so foolish to plan such a big theft for such a small amount and the seller was foolish to enter his car and sell bitcoins. The buyer was rich enough to own a car and he robbed $1100? What if the seller had nothing in his bitcoin wallet and had to be a cheat himself?
|
|
|
|
ok i agree what you said, but tell me one thing why you guys promote gambling site...now don't tell me it is different, then also newbies can go and lose there money. Anyways there is nothing safe with bitcoin/online.
There is a difference between a gambling site and an obvious scam site. A gambling site pays if a person wins a bet while a scam website doesn't pay no matter what you win or lose. I too don't like gambling websites/ponzis to be promoted on this forum but the forum rules state that one should be wise enough to know what's right or wrong but scam sites are cheats compared to gambling websites. I myself don't trust gamblers as they don't work hard to earn that money and just gamble it. If I know that a website is a cheat/scam, it would be wrong on my path to promote it. |
|
|
|
I would like to thank the MOD/Admin who removed my reported comment. My report was quite rude (I accept) and am really sorry for that as I was upset about personal attacks and abusive comments not being removed and am happy that finally the comment is deleted. Thanks again.  |
|
|
|
|
We don't need members to be added or removed from the default trust list and instead we need scams to be moderated else we members should be alert of any user trying to scam other users. By adding a negative to an account, it doesn't stop users to come back with their alts (some of which get detected while others don't get detected). Rather than this, why shouldn't there be an end to the ability to create a new alt account? It does help scammers and makes it tough for the DT members to detect alts. That's not a thing they should do all day waiting to search for alt accounts of scammers but it should be a rule to stop alt accounts on this forum.
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I am looking for some advice on how i should start gaining trust here on bitcointalk market, any sughestion/advice is helpful.
Thanks
#1 dont promote ponzis (see your signature) #2 be honest So you mean all cloud mining firms are ponzi, i mean there are so may users participating in there campaign all are wrong? This way one should never promote gambling or casino. If you are promoting a scam website like cloudthink.io, you are encouraging others to get scammed as newbies may click on your signature and join that scam website. I can understand that you may not be asking anyone to join the signature website but it does raise questions when you trade on the forum. |
|
|
|
It's surprising that when one threatens the MODs, they delete the posts which are offensive else other offensive posts aren't delete. What hypocrisy? I thought all members are treated equally here but no, it's only a place where people can threaten and get their work done.
It is indeed sad that the moderation on bitcointalk.org sucks so badly. I will report those comments against me to the cyber crime cell. Those comments are definitely not to be entertained on a discussion forum unless the MODs hate women to an extent that they love them being abused. Moderation definitely is the worse here. Tomorrow anyone will threaten to kill someone and even commit such a crime but still those comments will be entertained here. |
|
|
|
|
It's surprising that when one threatens the MODs, they delete the posts which are offensive else other offensive posts aren't delete. What hypocrisy? I thought all members are treated equally here but no, it's only a place where people can threaten and get their work done.
|
|
|
|
|
When you find a person is a scammer, you should first leave him negative feedback and then open a scam accusation thread with any evidence you have to state.
"been named a scammer" please post this known scammer's profile link.
|
|
|
|
This forum can't help any user who is personally attacked or abused and even I've been abused a lot on this forum and those posts still exist. Using such words shows the standard of a person and arguing with them or removing those posts does no harm to them but it only makes us feel hurt. These posts also do exist here and they are found pretty constructive and hence I don't have anything to say: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1074134.220Just because my mom told me to calm down, I have not tried to be offensive else another person would have committed suicide due to those abusive words used for me. Even Facebook and Twitter allows such abusive comments and by trying to blackmail the forum admin won't help and I do feel bad for you but nothing can be done. |
|
|
|
Ebay should directly accept bitcoin payments and then it would be good enough as PP can be charged back but not bitcoins. Their split up with PayPal has not made a significant difference as they only offer that payment option for US goods. For Indians they do have another payment option paisapay but that's also not good enough.
ebay wouldn't do this directly because they thrive on the fact that the buyer is protected so some sort of escrow would need to be used and that's essentially what Paypal is, but obviously it can be easily gamed. Paypal need to start footing the bill out of their own pocket when something doesn't go right but that wont happen so the alternative is to stop using them but that wont happen either. PayPal supports the buyer/sender of the money in any case and thus the seller gets no protection whatsoever. A solid proof needs to be submitted to win a dispute and hence PayPal is not a convenient payment processor. Bitcoin payments will at least be a safe method to avoid chargebacks but still it can be abused if the seller is a fraud. In that case, ebay can offer an escrow as you recommended where the funds are released after the item has been delivered. Bitcoin payments are not restricted to any country unlike PP which is not an allowed payment processor in few countries. Ebay may adopt bitcoin payment due to its popularity and we can only hope that it does happen. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
