Bitcoin Forum
May 24, 2024, 12:48:20 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 »
121  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 25, 2015, 02:04:07 AM
I dont need to make new account. Even abuser like you dont change it Smiley

I think I (tried to) handle the situation in a mature way. You're the abusive one. Now that you've admitted you're an alt of BitcoinBoss666 it's painfully clear that you're an hypocrite.

I consider this case closed now.
In mature way Huh? thats why u give feedback without proof?(who is hypocrite)
Im not hypocrite. If you dont know what is scam and collateral read again.


Ah this is off topic and there's a different thread about your loan scam already. But since this topic is done I'll indulge you...

You don't seem to understand the concepts "loan" and "collateral".

Let me help you out:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/loan
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/collateral
http://banking.about.com/od/loans/a/definecollateral.htm

Having a collateral does not mean it's ok for you not to pay back the loan.
122  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 25, 2015, 01:37:33 AM
I dont need to make new account. Even abuser like you dont change it Smiley

I think I (tried to) handle the situation in a mature way. You're the abusive one. Now that you've admitted you're an alt of BitcoinBoss666 it's painfully clear that you're an hypocrite.

I consider this case closed now.
123  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 25, 2015, 01:30:25 AM
i urge anyone bored enough to be reading this: please compare my posts with BonusGame, and come to your own conclusion about who is posting "nonsense." Roll Eyes

like i said---not trust abuse. the feedback was accurate.

People are too bored. Why all this drama over some feedback?

tbh, and i hate that i let it happen....but i let this guy attacking me get to me. first i responded to his attacks on my "post quality." Roll Eyes then to his attempts to get me kicked out of my signature campaign. then he neg trusted me from multiple accounts and accused me of being another alt (which i am not).

so i said "fuck it. i'm gonna prove this guy is a scammer." and i did: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1189843.msg12515122#msg12515122
You are really master of troll:D i attack you first ? fucking intresting:D
I am scammer becouse guy earn 3 times more on this loan:D
 Learn what is fucking scam:D and show me who lost money Huh
And maybe i create new account to give you red trust? LOL
Where i attempts that i will kick you from campaign? I just tell you are spammer with really low quality post's and i must tell OP from signature about it. And i dont care what he will do.
And again greetings to you Candy. Soon you will get more red trust from your enemy not from my alt's dont worry..
You dont prove fucking nothing.

Sorry, BonusGame. You lost. I'm sure you'll try again with another account.
124  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: BonusGame = BitcoinBoss666 = known scammer on: September 25, 2015, 01:29:11 AM
"known scammer".
Please read first what is scam spammer;)
I dont pay my loan but he get 3 times more for this loan(my collateral account).
And i dont care what u think. You create new account to give me red feeback that was even funny.
Spam more to get payout from campaign  Grin
Please spam more with same post

Hilarious. So my spider sense was working properly. Thanks for outing them.
125  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 25, 2015, 01:10:34 AM
i urge anyone bored enough to be reading this: please compare my posts with BonusGame, and come to your own conclusion about who is posting "nonsense." Roll Eyes

like i said---not trust abuse. the feedback was accurate.

People are too bored. Why all this drama over some feedback?

Couple days ago? You created the BonusGame account August 30th. You made a single post on that day. When BiPolarBob got himself involved in some drama you suddenly started posting (september 15th). When the dust settled down 2 days later you stopped posting. Your only posts have been on related to BiPolarBob. I find your behaviour suspicious.

I waited some time to see if you'd be active in different parts, but after September 20th you didn't log in for 2 days. So I decided to tickle you a bit and leave the negative follow-up feedback. And in less than 2 hours you've somehow noticed my feedback. Could you explain how you managed to not log in but still are be so aware of when feedback gets added to your account?

Things smell fishy.
No, you are being hardcore judgemental now.
many people make new accounts just to abuse giveaways or prizes,also eople just pamper BOB because he does givaways..
it looks a bit suspicious but proves nothing.

I took a step back and re-evaluated the situation. It seems communication issue cloud the whole discussion. Fact is that Bonusgame basicly only posted on one subject. I still feel strongly that the account is shady, but I guess it could be just an alt to participate multiple times in a single giveaway; their defending Bob is because they don't want to lose their freebies.

I partially posted the negative to elicit a response. While I don't like the way they responded there have been no obvious alts involved. I'm removing the negative. Also I'm out of this mini-drama with renewed respect for users on DT dealing with similar stuff all the time.
Again you are wrong. I dont make this alt to partcipate multiple times to single giveaway. I make it to particpate in CONTEST. And in rules was points that people can use more accounts. That mean i dont break rules.
And as this guy write you hardcore judgemental everybody. Mr.Judge haha." their defending Bob is because they don't want to lose their freebies." <--know everything about everybody.

So you did participate with multiple accounts in a single "contest"? And you do control multiple accounst? Because that's what you're implying here. Note that I did not make any judgement on you doing that. And you don't want Bob to stop their giveaways, now do you? And I don't see you post about any contest in your post history. Please correct me if I'm wrong using some evidence.

PS. I find your "tone" aggravating and ask you to change it.
126  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 25, 2015, 12:50:46 AM
i urge anyone bored enough to be reading this: please compare my posts with BonusGame, and come to your own conclusion about who is posting "nonsense." Roll Eyes

like i said---not trust abuse. the feedback was accurate.

People are too bored. Why all this drama over some feedback?

Couple days ago? You created the BonusGame account August 30th. You made a single post on that day. When BiPolarBob got himself involved in some drama you suddenly started posting (september 15th). When the dust settled down 2 days later you stopped posting. Your only posts have been on related to BiPolarBob. I find your behaviour suspicious.

I waited some time to see if you'd be active in different parts, but after September 20th you didn't log in for 2 days. So I decided to tickle you a bit and leave the negative follow-up feedback. And in less than 2 hours you've somehow noticed my feedback. Could you explain how you managed to not log in but still are be so aware of when feedback gets added to your account?

Things smell fishy.
No, you are being hardcore judgemental now.
many people make new accounts just to abuse giveaways or prizes,also eople just pamper BOB because he does givaways..
it looks a bit suspicious but proves nothing.

I took a step back and re-evaluated the situation. It seems communication issue cloud the whole discussion. Fact is that Bonusgame basicly only posted on one subject. I still feel strongly that the account is shady, but I guess it could be just an alt to participate multiple times in a single giveaway; their defending Bob is because they don't want to lose their freebies.

I partially posted the negative to elicit a response. While I don't like the way they responded there have been no obvious alts involved. I'm removing the negative. Also I'm out of this mini-drama with renewed respect for users on DT dealing with similar stuff all the time.

Edit:
Oh, and the irony of trust abuse. Go look in the mirror, BonusGame.
127  Other / Meta / Re: Support request to post service logo on: September 23, 2015, 09:11:21 AM
May be make an exemption on Marketplace boards with say 1 image max?

I'm quite indifferent to this, but maybe a system similar to the proxy fee could be used. You want to post images? Pay a token fee to the forum.

PS: The image shows on the users post history: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=556242;sa=showPosts
128  Economy / Reputation / Re: ABitNut Abusing trust system. on: September 23, 2015, 05:18:24 AM
Hi. Couple days ago i make new account,becouse i sell my last.
I saw people attack BiPolar call him scammer or quickseller other acc.
I this is not true and i defend BiPolar in this thread.
Dont post a lot becouse i dont have time for it.
And this guy first give me neutral trust and after PM he gave me red trust.
Why he is abusing trust system wtf?



Couple days ago? You created the BonusGame account August 30th. You made a single post on that day. When BiPolarBob got himself involved in some drama you suddenly started posting (september 15th). When the dust settled down 2 days later you stopped posting. Your only posts have been on related to BiPolarBob. I find your behaviour suspicious.

I waited some time to see if you'd be active in different parts, but after September 20th you didn't log in for 2 days. So I decided to tickle you a bit and leave the negative follow-up feedback. And in less than 2 hours you've somehow noticed my feedback. Could you explain how you managed to not log in but still are be so aware of when feedback gets added to your account?

Things smell fishy.


PS. I would have appreciated it if you'd have sent me a pm with a link to this topic instead of waiting for me to find it by myself.
PS 2. Not that anyone questioned them, but the 2 personal messages in the screenshot are correct.
129  Other / Meta / Re: What is Trust in the forum? on: September 23, 2015, 12:43:21 AM
it's a reputation system. you get it by doing trades. well, mostly.

the above quote was meant to be a joke. the accumulated btc you'll be giving away will be much much much much higher than what you can get with your reputation.

You would be surprised how many benefits come with being trusted. Just be honest all of the time and keep a level head when things get crazy here. It takes years to build up a good reputation and only one bad move to ruin it.

I can only agree with the last part, it takes only one bad move to become public to ruin your trust. But it takes (probably far) less than a year to get a good reputation (on a new alt account). This is what con men do. They're good at gaining trust.

Depends on what you define as a "good reputation". Not a chance I would send first to someone without years of trust built up here. It took over a year before I no longer had people ask to escrow when trading with me. Everyone will have different views on what is trusted and what is not though.

Does this qualify as sending first:
Quote
Quickseller -492: -9 / +20   2015-05-14   1.50000000      Purchased a coin from me...we both paid/shipped at the same time.

Because Quickseller registered on July 22, 2014, 05:51:40 AM. Not what I would call "years of trust".

QS was a special case due to how much effort he put into the forums.

Fair enough. Obviously the person behind the QuickSeller account was very familiar with the forum before they started using that alias. It's fairly safe to assume they have at least one other account on here that is isolated from the whole drama about the QuickSeller account and its known alts. That account is most likely still here and well trusted.

I picked them as example because admittedly I do not have other concrete examples of accounts that managed to gain trust as effectively. The issue I have with this is that a knowledgeable person could create an alt, get it trusted and be in a position to pull off some scam in about 6 months. Sure, it will require effort but the whole building up trust thing is exactly what con men are about.

To bring it back to topic, the trust system on this forum is an attempt to quantify how trusted any given member is based on feedback given by those in your trust list.
130  Other / Meta / Re: I bought an account for friend what do I do next? [Continued] on: September 22, 2015, 05:37:03 AM
Keep challenging BCX and they may roll up your account farming / selling operation.

Or do as BCX suggests, drop the subject and continue your (questionable) business.
131  Economy / Goods / Re: [WTS] Honey from Thailand on: September 22, 2015, 05:10:50 AM
Can you show me more bigger image of honey ?
What's the different benefit rather than just ordinary honey ?
How much do you charge for shipping into Indonesia ?

It appears shipping is pretty much prohibitively expensive for selling honey. Shipping 1 KG to Indonesia the cheapest (=slowest) way would be about BTC0.045.

I will close this thread soon, since it's pretty much useless.
132  Other / Meta / Re: What is Trust in the forum? on: September 22, 2015, 04:52:49 AM
it's a reputation system. you get it by doing trades. well, mostly.

the above quote was meant to be a joke. the accumulated btc you'll be giving away will be much much much much higher than what you can get with your reputation.

You would be surprised how many benefits come with being trusted. Just be honest all of the time and keep a level head when things get crazy here. It takes years to build up a good reputation and only one bad move to ruin it.

I can only agree with the last part, it takes only one bad move to become public to ruin your trust. But it takes (probably far) less than a year to get a good reputation (on a new alt account). This is what con men do. They're good at gaining trust.

Depends on what you define as a "good reputation". Not a chance I would send first to someone without years of trust built up here. It took over a year before I no longer had people ask to escrow when trading with me. Everyone will have different views on what is trusted and what is not though.

Does this qualify as sending first:
Quote
Quickseller -492: -9 / +20   2015-05-14   1.50000000      Purchased a coin from me...we both paid/shipped at the same time.

Because Quickseller registered on July 22, 2014, 05:51:40 AM. Not what I would call "years of trust".
133  Other / Meta / Re: Ban appeal - TradeFortress; re theymos dox on: September 22, 2015, 03:27:38 AM

@Tradefortress


1. Most everyone who has been around for a while knows exactly who Theymos is, Why would anyone get banned for that?

2. You're not the original Tradefortress, you're just someone who bought his old VIP account so who cares if you are banned?



~BCX~




Ignoring the huge @Tradefortress here.

1. Yes, why would anyone get banned from that?!?
2.
  a) Do you have conclusive evidence to guarantee that there is a different person using the account now? (I know it seems like it, but can you guarantee it? If so, we could remove/change all the old trust to neutral.)
  b) Some people care about "random" banning, because they realize they might become a victim of it themselves someday. The account in question is not really relevant to this issue.
134  Other / Meta / Re: What is Trust in the forum? on: September 22, 2015, 01:33:29 AM
it's a reputation system. you get it by doing trades. well, mostly.

the above quote was meant to be a joke. the accumulated btc you'll be giving away will be much much much much higher than what you can get with your reputation.

You would be surprised how many benefits come with being trusted. Just be honest all of the time and keep a level head when things get crazy here. It takes years to build up a good reputation and only one bad move to ruin it.

I can only agree with the last part, it takes only one bad move to become public to ruin your trust. But it takes (probably far) less than a year to get a good reputation (on a new alt account). This is what con men do. They're good at gaining trust.
135  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: So What now? ฿itcoin is dead? READ on: September 22, 2015, 01:29:01 AM
If we bitcoin remains as is, soon transactions could take up to 1 hour to confirm, meaning bitcoin will become a useless micro payment tool..

Even during the stress test my transactions came through pretty fast. Did you mean to say "If Bitcoin remains as is soon transactions without fee could take up to 1 hour to be included in a block." and "having to pay fees will make micro payments less attractive"?

I have no problem with that. Free transactions will be at the end of the queue. You get what you pay for.

But if we choose to increase the block size bitcoin will become more centralized?

I don't have a problem with it at the moment.

So whats the solution?

My take on it is that bitcoin should remain as is, meaning the block sizes should remain the same, and transaction confirmation time is not an issue, since bitcoin was never intended to be a quickest way to send, decentralization was the main goal, lets not forget that.
So bitcoin transactions taking hours to be confirmed is nto an issue, bitcoin is the gold of the crypto world, other alt coins that are quicker to use an more practical for micro payment situations will emerge, but bitcoin should remain as the back bone of crypto currency.

Yes quick confirmation is essential for micro payments, like buying something at a store, you don't want to wait an hour to wait until the payment is confirmed. But bitcoin is not only used for micro payments, some people use bitcoin to send money over seas, as seen with cyprus and greece, sending millions or even billions of dollars any where around the world in a number of hours doesn't sound so bad does it?

So in my opinion bitcoin should be left untouched, soon new alt coins will fill in the void space beneath bitcoin and will complete the crypto world.

I guess I somewhat agree with you. Some transactions do not require as much speed as others. I say pay an higher fee for high priority transactions and a lower fee for common transactions. Bitcoin accommodates both.
136  Other / Meta / Re: [poll] Should doxing be banned? on: September 22, 2015, 12:36:35 AM
I'd ask anyone voting no to volunteer your doxes, because that's essentially what you're saying.

And I'd suggest anyone voting yes to be more careful with their personal information. Because some rule on this forum is not going to protect you much.

Yeah by your logic everything should be allowed, you would tell people to be more careful, why did you get raped? You werent careful enough, why did you got hacked, you werent careful enough, by your logic we should let any criminal free because itīs not their fault, itīs our fault

If you left you car parked at a mall, unlocked with the keys in the ignition, it's not allowed for anyone to take your car without your explicit permission. However I would suggest to be a bit more careful and not leaving your car like that in the first place. Because some people don't follow the rule book and your car will be gone.

Nowhere did I say any criminal should get off the hook because the victim was (too) careless. I will say however that I am against rules that cannot be enforced. Those will only restrict decent people and help those who do not care about rules to get ahead.

I'm not against releasing someones personal information without their consent if it's the best option there is. We've seen scammers do it to discredit their critics. Those scammers would do it regardless of any rule (though they may have to use a different storage location). I don't want the "good guys" to be limited where the bad guys can do it without any consequence.
137  Other / Meta / Re: [poll] Should doxing be banned? on: September 21, 2015, 01:53:28 AM
I'd ask anyone voting no to volunteer your doxes, because that's essentially what you're saying.

And I'd suggest anyone voting yes to be more careful with their personal information. Because some rule on this forum is not going to protect you much.
138  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Proof that Quickseller is BiPolarBob/PistolPete AND intended to SCAM! on: September 21, 2015, 01:21:13 AM
QS has left now that I released his funds from escrow (the deal he was waiting on before leaving).

I doubt he has left. He probably just ditched that alt now that it has been caught out.

He is probably focusing on his many other alt accounts now.

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, but I am guessing he would keep it low key. Overall he messed up, but compared to the 100s of scams here he is small potatoes. Why not dox the big scammers like FriedCat who walked with millions? It amuses me that people care more about a guy who self escrowed and did not steal over people who take lots of coins and bail.

I doubt they're keeping it low key. I assume they have other established accounts. One of them probably took part in the whole saga in a level-headed way. It's a "logical" thing to build trust and also distance the "new" account a bit from the known QuickSeller accounts. And from here on it's just business as usual.
139  Other / Meta / Re: Add decimal to Reported Posts Accuracy on: September 17, 2015, 10:05:49 AM
It would just kick the can down the road.

Lets do a little caluclation on this. Assuming all your 417 reports are handled (unlikely) and exactly 98% are correct. That leaves us with 408.66 good and 8.34 bad reports or 409 and 8 rounded. In order to reach 99% you need 383 more(!) (792 total) good reports without a single bad one.
In order to reach 98.1 % you need 5 more good reports, for 98.2% 28 more, for 98.3% 54 more.

Which is, for now an improvement, but only for a while. Once you reach 2940 good our of 3000 total reports (assuming 98%, all handled again), you would need 333 good reports for that sweet 98.1% to show up.

Its not that I have a problem with this, but you will run into this problem again.

The easier way to prevent this problem would be to show something like "X reports [y good, z bad, 0 pending since our mods rock!]".

But as you said the inaccuracy may be intentional.
140  Other / Meta / Re: Wardrick account hacked---trust abuse resolution in sight (finally) on: September 17, 2015, 05:50:14 AM
I think wardrick made it fairly clear that he had zero intention of removing the negative trust against you prior to him getting hacked. So if he did have access to his account there would be a near zero chance he would remove your negative trust, so his account being hacked really does not change anything.

Fair enough, assuming the person behind the trust is not the same person that is behind the QuickSeller account. Putting a negative feedback and explicitly saying you're never going to remove it - regardless of any future events - is questionable to some though.

I am also confused as to why you are pushing for your negative trust to get removed so hard now that you are not participating in a signature campaign. I was under the understanding that the whole reason you were resorting to intimidation tactics to get your negative trust removed was because you wanted to be able to participate in signature deals.
So your understanding was lacking. It happens.

I also find it very interesting that the timestamp on your computer when you created your PGP key was ~24 hours prior to when dooglus first started posting in this thread, and blindly was supporting you despite clear and concise evidence that you are a scammer and that you resort to intimidation tactics to install fear into anyone who calls you out as a scammer. The fact that you were unable to get they keyserver link right on your signature for a good while is an indication that you really do not know what you are doing when it comes to PGP, so I think it would be unlikely that you changed the time/date on your computer prior to creating your PGP key.

I wonder what exactly you were needing to encrypt less then 24 hours prior to dooglus blindly supporting you. It seems very fishy to me. I would not be surprised if it was something malicious 
What's the point of this piece of FUD? Also you calling tspacepilot a scammer is based on something that happened a long time ago. Something that you cannot have a full understanding of. If you want to beat that dead horse some more I'm sure you can find a more appropriate thread to do so.

Good luck.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!