You generally need to be very trustrd to buy Bitcoin with PayPal. Plus 5 percent should be enough however you probably won't be able to buy large amounts.

information could easily be left off or additional information could be presented to disprove a scan accusacation. Locking a thread before it is resolved would prevent such information from being presented.

This is not true. It is not unusual for someone to post a dubious scam accusation against someone. If there is evidence the disproves such accusations the person post such accusation could lock their thread making their accuser look like they really scammed when they did not.

If you bothered to read the 3rd post above post you would see that I am not continuing the campaign.

Thank you, I appreciate that.It was a pleasure working with you as well

No.

Your websites are ~a month old. They have not reached that level of value in only one month.
I will have to pass then
If you say so.
I am not sure how the collateral is secure if either the lender or an escrow is not 100% in control of the websites/domains.

I think a potential lender would like this more then you, but this doesn't mean it will happen.

Sure they can. You can buy both traffic and clicks for next to nothing. The quality of both is almost always very low quality. If your adsense (or any other advertiser) finds out you are buying traffic/clicks they will likely withhold payment and will try to recover any payment given to you from purchased traffic (in court if necessary)

Unfortunately the campaign has concluded. I don't think it had a very positive effect on sales unfortunately.

You can take up to an additional 10 days to make the additional 5 posts and can remove the signature once you make as many posts (you are free to keep it on if you chose to do so).

Thanks again for all your help.

I still have doubts about the legitimacy of the value and revenue of your domains.

If you can provide a more stable altcoin for collateral (then your likely worthless domains) then I would be willing to do this. (assuming you can offer an acceptable interest rate)

This is because you have not received any negative ratings from anyone on the default trust list. They are "untrusted"
I don't think you understand how the trust system works. You are not on default trust list because CITM gave you positive feedback, you are on it because he added you to his trust list. The two are suppose to be very different and distinct actions (however for CITM they are one and the same)

The reason he should not give his proof is because doing so would reveal what other scammers can do in the future to avoid this kind of detection. Withholding proof is the lesser of two evils.

---

The others who have left negative feedback for the above potential alts should remove it if they are only relying on BadBear's word. If they have seen such evidence or have seen other different proof then the ratings would be appropriate. If they trust BadBear's word about the ratings then they should add BadBear to their trust list so anyone that trusts them will also trust BadBear's ratings (if their trust depth is set deep enough). This is one drawback of not providing such proof as it limits the number of appropriate negative feedback ratings of scammer alts

I propose that the ability to lock Scam Accusations threads be restricted to only Administrators (and maybe Global Moderators) and to have a policy to only lock a thread when all parties agree the dispute has been resolved.

This will prevent accusers from being able to essentially self moderate their own Scam Accusation threads (and prevent evidence from being presented against their claim). When accusations are not resolved but threads are locked the result will be someone else opening a "continuance" thread that only adds to confusion (which opens up the probability of multiple threads).

Case in point this thread has been locked (and unlocked) multiple times, preventing others from being able to provide additional evidence and additional commentary. According to this post the thread was locked because "socks" were posting in the thread, and the thread would remain locked until they get banned (it is not against forum rules to have alt accounts, although it is scammy behavior to have your own alts vouch for yourself - however the forum does not moderate scams). The above thread getting locked resulted in this thread being opened that has remained open the entire time. I think it is fair to say everyone is aware of the negatives associated with having duplicate threads so I will not get into that (however I can if necessary).

Not only that but this thread was opened in service discussion because other threads were locked (I assume he is referencing the original scam accusation as that his the thread he linked to). Additionally this(1), this(2), and this(3) were all opened in reputation with very similar topics of discussion. I can only speculate as to why so many threads were opened.

In total there were 6 topics posted about essentially the same scam accusation.

I would have to agree with TECSHARE's general argument that Nubbins should be removed from default trust list.

From what I could tell during the entire Woodcollector debate was that anyone who spoke in support of Woodcollector or questioned anyone who was giving "evidence" or "testimony" regarding the potential legitimacy of Woodcollector was almost always given negative trust from Nubbins.

There was even one rating (that he has since removed) that he gave someone with a comment of "harassment" and a reference link  to a post in the original scam accusation thread. I skimmed through the thread and was unable to locate what I think the referenced post was (it could have been deleted, it could have actually been in one of the other threads, or I could have missed it), however it was something along the lines of asking nubbins to provide video proof of his work/business in a similar way that nubbins was asking Woodcollector for proof. This may have been one of the people that BadBear tagged as being an alt of Woodcollector (really not sure) however BadBear has access to a lot more information then Nubbins does, and the negative trust seems to have been left almost immediately after the post in question (making it unlikely he received any actual evidence of them being alts of Woodcollector). There is a very big difference between leaving negative feedback for someone based on speculation (and being right) and leaving negative feedback based on facts you have personal knowledge of.

I would say that what Nubbins was doing was essentially intimidating people into agree with him (or at the very least intimidating people against disagreeing with him). This resulted in people almost blindly agreeing with nubbins more or less the entire time. This is despite that there was varying levels of evidence against Woodcollector (and evidence that Woodcollector was "innocent") over the past several days.

My impression is that nubbins more or less "bused" Woodcollector of scamming via speculation and was able to essentially catch Woodcollector in lies in his response plus the fact that Woodcollector was using likely alts to further his cause. (although the allegations are still somewhat up for debate, as well as the fact that Woodcollector was actually scamming). The original claims against Woodcollector now are very different then what they were when the scam accusation was first opened.

I think at this point we are primarily arguing about semantics. I don't think this is anywhere near the scandal it was made out to be.

Did he misrepresent himself in claiming to "hand carve" all his pieces? Probably but this really depends on your definition of "hard carved", and pre these threads would probably not demanded such a strict definition of "hand carved" as is being asked for now.

Would his art have been valued/sold for less if these threads were never made but WC published the same video for potential customers to see how is art is made? Maybe - but not 90%+ levels as previously discussed as the pieces are made in a manual fashion and WC would need to put a lot of work into his pieces and would not sell for 90%+ discounts (he would be earning sub min wage if he did). The use of a laser implies (to me) that the pieces were made via some automated process.

Was he using a laser to carve the piece in the video? No. He may have used something to burn the sketch into the wood, however as mentioned above the disclosure of such would not diminish the value of his work by 90%+

Can you sign the following message from 1MGQ6KtKnuSjwtv6Dq6Mqbpigtq4mzfCuR which you posted here:
If you do not know how to sign a message then I can give instructions on how to do so.

EDIT: do you even still need this loan since you were going to repay within 24 hours but 24 hours has passed since you requested it?

Out of the 84 posts that you have made, your last 42 of them (50%) were made in a WC thread. Two of your posts were in altcoin threads prior to those 42 posts. Prior to that, your last post was made in April 2014. Are you sure you are not a sock of nubbins?

I have read the thread previously. Although I agree that they are probably socks of WC, such fact has not been proven. As I have mentioned previously it is possible they are socks of some other party who is trying to make WC look bad by making it obvious they are socks and are supporting him.

I don't see how anyone would expect the art to be original from his own mind when his customers were giving him an outline of what they wanted. Even in the times that WC used pictures that he owned the license to, he still made chances to the actual design and would still be original. Just because he wanted to build a laser does not mean that he was using it on the pieces that he sold (or even that he actually built it).
No I do not trust everything that WC says, nor do I trust what most of the people have said in any of the threads. Even if I did trust what he says it would be stupid to randomly send funds to him without some kind of prior arrangement for him to send them back. You suggesting that I do this is nothing more then an attempt to distract the argument

Okay, I am fairly certain that most people that are posting on here do not know any more about wood then I do, but I at least admit as much.

I have the same right to get involved as anyone else here does.

It seems like anyone who disagrees with nubbins' has been labeled a scammer

I agree that WC reacted very poorly throughout this fiasco however I think it was really nubbins that was leading the mob against him.

To be honest, I have no idea. I really do not know that much about wood to say one way or another. I would say that even if it were carved with a laser with an initial imprint then it would not be the scam that this is being made out to be. Without being able to touch the piece I really cannot even say with certainty if the piece is carved or is just burned as of the picture that smoothie attached.