Even if the trust was removed, the account would still have a negative reputation attached to it so it would be difficult for someone to sell for the "true" price of a hero

This actually has worked with one of my buyers before. I had lent to someone with negative trust with their account as collateral, they didn't pay and someone was looking for a senior account for really cheap and was willing to take one with negative trust. He messaged Vod and he removed the trust. It happened on this post

I personally don't think it would work in this case

For clarification for anyone considering to buy this account, it has been banned from the bit mixer campaign so even though he is now wearing the signature, you will not be able to earn money from it

edit: per https://bitmixer.io/signature.html uid 132747 is showing as active, however he was complaining that he was banned from the campaign previously 

For your negative balance problem at cex I would suggest posting here or creating a new thread here. The former would probably result in you getting a better response (although cex/ghash does not seem to be very active in the forum), you may get a better response by contacting their support.

In regards to trying to determine what to do with your BTC I would suggest first browsing the trading discussion board and if you cannot find the answer you are looking for then create a new thread in that board (or if there is an active discussion similar to your situation you may want to contribute to an existing topic).

Your in

Unfortunately I will only pay you as a full member, although I will take into consideration that you received a promotion if you make a lot of posts and my campaign works out for me in terms of sales

there would probably be 3 potential appropriate places for this kind of question. Service discussion as H&C mentioned, mining support or the ghash pool thread.

Yes cex is cloud mining, probably one of the only legit ones (they more or less have proof of mining ect. but the prices for their cloud mining are set for the market because they are tradable and are very overpriced)

no. Google auth has nothing to do with email. You are given a qr code to scan and anyone that has access to the qr code can display the 6 digit code you enter that proves you controlled the accoint at the time it was set up. It is similar to signing a message

I think 2fa in general would be beneficial. But I don't think email is the right way to do it. Maybe Google authentator would be a better solution.

someone could potentially want a vanity email address that matches their bitcointalk username (he could register the username on the major email providers (gmail, yahoo, outlook, etc). I agree that this would be horrible security, but then again a lot of people here are pretty clueless about security

See this post why that may actually be a step in the opposite direction in terms of protecting account security

Email accounts are easier to compromise then forum accounts. Maybe it is uncommon, maybe not, IDK.

I do think the rule that an email address can only be associated with one account should be lifted. If someone were to try to hack accounts via this method then they could attempt to change their a number of email addresses they think they can hack and when they get an error saying that email is associated with another account they know they can try to hack it

He pissed offbitpop a lot when he opened a random scam accusation against him with zero validity.

People still do pay .4+ for a senior account, as you can make a good amount of money with relatively little effort.

Signature advertising is probably the best way for someone to earn BTC while getting involved in the community and learning about bitcoin.

I think the ability to recover/reset your password via email actually decreases security. For example BitMiningInvestments just offered to sell me the email address quickseller@live.com

I obviously am not going to buy the account, however if I did buy it then I might add it to my bitcointalk profile and he could later try to recover it via social engineering from microsoft (which has a much lower standard to recover accounts then the forum does). Once he recovers the email account he can reset my password and have access to the account.

So you admit to hacking RiverBoadBTC?

I am not sure what you are claiming to be a lie It isn't like your trust isn't obvious trolling as there is 0 evidence attached to them, plus anytime someone leaves multiple negative trust reports their credibility declines.

For the record, no I am not BTCTalkAccounts. I try to avoid dealing with hacked accounts. As I am fairly certain you said to me (via RiverBoatBTC)

From the time you started trolling onward really should be split into another thread as your trolling has caused this to get very offtopic

Confirmed.

I was going to say that BitMiningInvestments was an alt of TF or Blazr as TF had access to BTCTalkAccounts per this post and Blazr was apparently an alt of BTCTalkAccounts (not 100% on this). However it appears that the account that hilariousandco sent a PM to regarding potentially buying an account is a different account selling account (although it is plausible that BTCTalkAccounts had more then one account selling account for a number of reasons, including the fact that they were apparently banned).

I am fairly certain that you are an alt of the person who hacked RiverBoatBTC as you gave me negative trust right around the time I revealed that the hacker was trying to sell the account. This post promises "revenge" for my revealing that it was trying to be sold. Additionally my only communication with you is below:
Which you left me additional negative feedback for trying to blackmail you. I think it is reasonable to conclude the above message is not blackmail.

Since the account that Hilariousandco sent a PM to regarding buying an account dealt in hacked accounts, and BitMiningInvestments had it's password reset recently, I would believe that BitMiningInvestments is probably a hacked account.

I would also conclude that you are an alt of one of the many account sellers that has recently popped up on here and/or are otherwise involved in the sale of accounts (maybe via off forum trades). You appear to either think hilariousandco sells accounts (so you want to bash your competition) or do not like the fact that he often defends the sale of accounts (which would hurt off forum trades).

EDIT: the feedback that you left me is another indication that you are trying to harm your competition (if you are in fact selling accounts) and is an indication of you trolling

It would be reasonable to say the rule would apply to who is 'red' in their trust network (anyone can make up their own trust network to make it look like any user is trustworthy to themselves). You have also made a lot of flaming posts which is generally considered spam

At this point I am not able/willing to sell it anymore.