Someone who is naive enough to install 1 GB worth of software from a random person claiming to be hiring them from a forum that has a large number of people keeping large amounts of money on their computer.

He asked me for a .01 loan via PM that would be secured by 10,000 DOGE, which at the time was worth ~.0065 BTC. I explained to him that is not how collateral loans work and that he would need to offer collateral that is worth more then the loan amount, he said that he would try to get more DOGE to be able to borrow .01 BTC.

Maybe an hour or two after that he PM'ed me again saying that he "lost" the doge from paying back a friend 8.5k DOGE and gambling the rest.

At first I thought that he simply did not understand how collateral loans work but by the end of my encounter with him, I believed that he was trying to scam me out of ~.0035 or potentially pull some kind of larger scam.

i may have made a mistake here but you are still making much less lending to you then you would on bitfinex based on your numbers 2.5 times as much on bitfinex
Edit: also I believe you can set it up so anytime a swap is closed bitfinex will automatically open a new swap at the flash rate so you can lend 24/7 /edit your math is flawed. If you are offering .02% per week (as you stated for your btc/ltc rate) then you will earn .0001 btc per week if someone lent .5 btc. Your minimum however is much lower then that and from what I have seen you are more likely to attract lenders who can afford to lend less then .5 btc (based on amounts available for lending on other lenders' threads).

I also do not see the point of you borrowing potentially small amounts like this. You claim to be buying Bitcoin on an exchange in order to borrow Bitcoin that you will then sell on an exchange and will proceed to buy Bitcoin on an exchange to repay the loan.

you can lend out your bitcoin, you don't have to lend your fiat.The same is said with any escrow that is used but bitfinex has a longer history then most escrow providers and they also have more experience holding much more money then any escrow provider. The interest rate market is stable enough for this to not be an issue. You are offering ~5% of what would be earned via bitfinex and I think it would be very unlikely that interest rates would crash that low.
If you pay a standard fee of .0001 and lend you .5 then it would take a week to make the fee back in interest. This is the lowest amount that someone can break even after paying the TX fee in a week with your interest rates. If a fee is not included then it could take a long time to confirm and seeing how you are with offering fair terms I would say there would be a good chance you would claim it is taking too long to confirm and would send the funds back....with a fee (that would then now be required for the miners to likely confirm - not enough bitcoin days destroyed to qualify for a free TX)

you may or may not have thought of this but I would be sure to exclude anything in quotes (like a quoted message) as this will make it look like you are posting more then you really are if you quote a long message. I am not 100% sure how you would do this (little programming experience) but I wouldn't think it would be that difficult.

For example someone quoting the post that I quoted here and added only "this is good" should certainly be considered spam but would appear to be much longer if the quoted text is not excluded.

You will need to put up actual collateral if you want any lender to consider this loan.

There is nothing about the lender seeing what you are doing with the money that will force and/or incentivice you to repay the lender.

.02% per week? That is well under the daily rate on bitfinex. It would also not even cover the tx fees on smaller loans.

This is also a duplicate thread.

Probably not, but antidepressants can actually increase the risk of suicide for some people. They also effectively change your personality/the way you think, so some could say that antidepressants (along with mood stabilizers and others) can change who you are as a person.

I can do that.

That is 2.625 BTC for 50,000 NXT

Hmmm, that is ~3% above btcer.....would you be able to come down to 5185 sats?

Is this still a true statement? If so what kind of BTC/NXT rate can you offer for ~50k NXT?

Another major difference between Vod and the two other members who were removed from default trust is that Vod is much more active in calling out and neg repping scammers. Even if he makes a few mistakes the net effect is that the community is much safer as a result of him being on default trust. Yes this is somewhat hypocritical, but neither of the two people who lost their status as being on default trust lost any actual value or ability to trade (other then the fact that one of them probably had people seek to trade with them in small amounts in order to receive the positive feedback that was often left)

Also the two people removed from default trust gave their negative feedback because they were retaliating against someone making (arguably false) claims against their reputation, this has never been the case with Vod.

Plus it is possible to rebuild a person's reputation by successfully trading with others and if you get enough positive trades on your trust your "red" will turn neutral and eventually turn green if you get more trade reports.

You can look at the title of the thread in a person's post history. If the title starts with a "Re:" then it is a reply, if he title of the post does not have this then it is a new thread (at least this is how it is by default, someone could manually change the post title).

I think he is trying to weed out spammers with this rule (and others). I personally think this will end up backfiring as people will get denied payment for breaking the rules and get upset. Anyone that is denied payment for breaking the rules has the potential to make a lot of noise about the company and will likely counter the positive effect of signature advertising. I think the way that EvilPanda handles the GAW campaign (and the way that Stunna handled the PD campaign) is much more effective and less reputation risky then the way that the luckyb.it campaign is run (on the other end of the spectrum).

The result of this rule will probably be a lot more threads like this.

I don't think this is a very good way to get your negative trust removed. Plus someone could receive payment and then remove the negative trust.

I think it would be a much better idea to discuss it with him directly, and if he declines to remove your negative trust you should remain active on the forum for a month or two (maybe a little longer) without any issues or scam accusations, and he will probably remove it. It is probably too late now that you are offering to pay for negative feedback to his profile.

Plus Vod generally does not do very many trades on here so even if his feedback is red it would not affect his ability to trade.

I am fairly certain that your offer is not going to be high enough for the risks involved but out of curiosity how much are you offering.

He is enthusiastically saying that without a doubt that the OP can be trusted, really to the point that he is vouching for the OP. You are saying (like monbux did) that you are willing to take the risk that you will not be paid, you leave open the possibility that the OP will end up scamming.

You are right, first come first serve can be cheated, but it is more difficult to do so and when it is cheated it is easier to tell that it is being cheated. Picking members this way makes cheating much easier and harder to detect. Also it appears that the OP is specifically targeting users with positive trust, they even added a spot when monbux PM'ed the OP asking if there was an open spot. By having users with positive trust it increases the chances that someone will see a trusted user's signature and would be willing to do less due diligence on the site and invest in their mining contracts, so it would make it easier for the site to scam if that is their intention (I do think they are a scam site and I am not alone, just look at their [ann] thread).

I am not sure if you are trolling or not, but either way I am flattered.

The only person who claimed that someone had ben selected for the job was someone other then the OP and as far as I am concerned was not speaking for the OP. Additionally the OP was not updated to reflect the fact the spot has been filled which is something that I would expect from a reputable person (to avoid people waisting their time applying and showing their qualifications for a position that is not available)

The obvious scam is obvius.

Edit: I have a 100 btc trade that I would like to complete, can you give me a trusted address to send funds to?

I am not a moderator but looking at your post history I see that you have a lot of very short posts so you were probably banned for signature spamming. I don't think your ban will get lifted.

The bit.in campaign seems to get a lot of signature spam banned accounts. 

Okay that is my mistake. However it only strengthens my argument. Marcotheminer is much more trusted then carro and if you are asking for escrow when marco is running a campaign then it is illogical for you to not ask for escrow when carro is running the campaign.
The rate is higher but the funds are being held by someone trusted, but we are not discussing their campaign, we are discussing this one.

You are right, you have "asked" for escrow a few times:
However you have shown blind support for carra23 many more times:
This post was the post you made immediately after you said that you prefer monbux to be escrow. You also appear to be rather active in this thread, the only person supporting Carra23, and the other people who might have been more active then you have been either trying to get an escrow deal to build their reputation or are calling Carra23 out as needing to use escrow.