Do you think that the (supposedly) bought account came along wit the twitter one? Sounds unlikely to me, not impossible though.
I think so, see my speculation above. The seller probably was in short of money, otherwise selling a green account like this which was in signature campaigns didn't make much sense. He probably sold whatever he could. There were two password changes on 23 and 28 April. There is a gap in posting from 21 to 29 April so it looks like the account was sold through an escrow which for some reason took 5 days. The post style changed to one of poor English.
If it was hacked, we would've seen some complaint by now. It is clearly a bought account and it wouldn't have come cheap considering the trust rating. Makes it even more surprising that such a huge risk was taken for a small profit.
The recent reset may mean that the loan has been given and the account transferred. This thread was started at 7:43am, the edit was done at 9:57am and the password reset at 11:05am. In that case someone bought an Hero account without any ownership proof for 0.8 BTC.
|
|
|
|
Disk failure isn't unlikely, especially with older drives and operating systems. But it could very well be an excuse, there's no proper way to prove that this is true. I'll have to admit though, Vod's rating on you is rather aggressive, giving the same rating to a lower ranked member would have been more reasonable, aside of that your password wasn't changed for a month's time (else it would be showing on your profile). Sig campaign swap on March 17: With that said, the account still seems to have a similar style of posting with the one it had in the early days of its creation. Furthermore, the twitter account posted in a message here earlier was also posted in unedited posts from 2014. And according to that, I pose the following question to Vod: Would a post from his twitter account verifying that he still owns it serve as appropriate proof that the account wasn't hacked? I'll attach relevant quotes below. Following tweet was retweeted by his twitter account on Summer 2014: https://twitter.com/vineetsonkar/status/481823158375165955As asked to do so in this post: Retweeted as amacar, you don't need to tip me. This twitter's account's posting history seems to me lining up with the bitcointalk one nicely. Even if the most valuable of the two, the bitcointalk one was hacked, most likely that the twitter one wouldn't come with it (  ). That's why I'm thinking that if he signed a message through his twitter (instead of a BTC address since he claims that he lost his drive) would be good enough to prove ownership of the account. He edited an old post today trying to use it claim the loan. Besides being dishonest, it shows a lack of understanding of this forum, which doesn't fit with someone of 500+ activity, 1.3k+ posts. Its clearly a bought account. He thought that he could make a quick profit by taking a loan based on the rating. |
|
|
|
|
There were two password changes on 23 and 28 April. There is a gap in posting from 21 to 29 April so it looks like the account was sold through an escrow which for some reason took 5 days. The post style changed to one of poor English.
If it was hacked, we would've seen some complaint by now. It is clearly a bought account and it wouldn't have come cheap considering the trust rating. Makes it even more surprising that such a huge risk was taken for a small profit.
The recent reset may mean that the loan has been given and the account transferred. This thread was started at 7:43am, the edit was done at 9:57am and the password reset at 11:05am. In that case someone bought an Hero account without any ownership proof for 0.8 BTC.
|
|
|
|
Many low value posts. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=499870;sa=showPosts. That could be the reason for your ban. It is a permanent ban from the message you posted. When you buy an account you always carry the risk that it was already banned earlier. In this case it was, otherwise you wouldn't have got a permanent ban.
What is your account?
Read the message but couldn't find the username? I had read it as again on the small screen. I looked again and then went searching for the account and then posted it. |
|
|
|
|
You can ask. The trust system can be manipulated so don't put much value on it. If you want to increase your rating set up trades with a default trust member, and then ask escrow from another. You'll receive two default points for only making a trade where nobody needed to trust you.
Its better if you check ahead to see if they give feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing with the campaign. Had a bad 2 weeks posting wise, sharp drop from the 29 posts the 2 weeks before that. One of those times I wish this was a monthly campaign.
Post count: 430
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
There wont be a rematch. Mayweather wont want to risk fighting again as he has more to lose with his unbeaten record. He just did this for the massive amount of money and they wont get as much for another fight. I would like to see them have another go but I can't see it. Mayweather's next fight is going to be a disappointment though whoever he fights (unless he gets beaten).
More to lose? A fight against Manny is as sure a victory for Floyd as possible. I can see Floyd retiring after 49 games and then coming back for a rematch for his 50. |
|
|
|
You have to make sure you post the once in each two week period to get the full activity points. If your post count is 14 or more higher than your activity then you'll get the full 14 points just for the one post, otherwise it'll move up per post (up to 14). You can collect the full activity points at a later date though as long as you have posted once in thosr two week periods. Read through this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=495948.0w hats the maximum activity one can get in 14 days period..??can some one get 14+ activity in 24 hours??If you have more than 14 unclaimed activity points then yes. In principle you can take an account with 35 posts and 35 activity, posts 445 times within 24 hours and become Hero Member provided the initial 35 posts were made one at a time in every 2 week interval. You will get banned but that is a different issue. |
|
|
|
|
So many applicants. Putting my name in too.
PM me, I can provide best rate.
|
|
|
|
Received, thanks.
I want to re-enroll please.
Starting post:788
Btc address: 1pLynXJoDqYkmnDLPVwyVFSzeQKsP8ocy
The campaign is temporarily closed. He said closed for ''new'' enrollment. I'm not new  He considers all enrollment as new. Enrollments do not go on, you have to register everytime. |
|
|
|
Received, thanks.
I want to re-enroll please.
Starting post:788
Btc address: 1pLynXJoDqYkmnDLPVwyVFSzeQKsP8ocy
The campaign is temporarily closed. Today is the last day to sign up for this campaign! That's right, I'm closing to new enrollments. Tomorrow marks the one-year anniversary of the Lucky Bit signature campaign, and it's been a good year with some great results. The campaign is not going to disappear! In just a couple weeks, the campaign will be reborn with a new format, some new signatures, a new pay scale, and opportunities for people to earn some amazing bonuses as well as the continued tradition of the best per-post pay available. |
|
|
|
|
Continuing with this campaign.
Posts: 424
|
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=358020Look under "unconfirmed feedback", there is a positive trust from deluxeCITY that says "Was escrow for a trade for me, very professional service will use again for sure. A + ". deluxeCITY is an alt of Quickseller. He left himself positive trust and should be removed from the trust system as his sent feedback cannot be trusted if he is leaving himself fake feedback. Any proof? Would be a strange turn as Quickseller just preached me about about leaving that campaign. Here is a list of quicksellers accounts that he made: needFREElunch -sold- ACCTseller deluxeCITY ScreamnShout -- AnswerQuestion -/sold- IacceptBTC -/sold- dontCAREhair -sold- RedhatCAT fonenumba 98problems -sold- TRYpolar -sold- BTCfaucetTIME psudoBTC -sold- imBLACKjack -sold- confirmation120 Panthers52 BTCreward doggieTattoo GrounBEEFLamborghini -/banned- Inotanewbie -/sold- shockinglyugly -sold- thriftshopping GrandmaJean -sold- Haddem -/banned- nothing2seeHere -sold- cutepuppy -sold- ivonna -sold- screwUdriver iTRADEbtc -sold- Rum152 -sold- marryXmas -sold- ftoole -- There are others that he bought those are most of the ones he created himself. This is not proof. |
|
|
|
How is that a personal attack? I am merely pointing out that the site you are advertising for is by your own definition is "aiding and embedding" a scammer by failing to disclose a scammer's withdrawal addresses.
Make a scam thread. If dogedice receives valid negatives I will leave. "aiding and embedding"? Some joke I am not understanding? |
|
|
|
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=358020Look under "unconfirmed feedback", there is a positive trust from deluxeCITY that says "Was escrow for a trade for me, very professional service will use again for sure. A + ". deluxeCITY is an alt of Quickseller. He left himself positive trust and should be removed from the trust system as his sent feedback cannot be trusted if he is leaving himself fake feedback. Any proof? Would be a strange turn as Quickseller just preached me about about leaving that campaign. |
|
|
|
I gave him the negative after the escrow deal had already been made. I remember seeing the sig campaign posts and hoping someone was escrowing it.
That clears it. Do you seriously think that I would sell trust for the $1 in escrow fees that I 'make'? If you cannot honestly think that someone in a first world country would seriously do that then you need to stop bringing up this fact.
If you could've cleared it earlier like BadBear did I wouldn't have to keep bringing it up.
BTW, **
Here comes the famed personal attack from Quickseller. ** the owner of the site that you are critical of me escrowing the signature campaign for has known addresses with huge amounts of taint with the gambling site you are advertising, had lost over 7 BTC on the site you are advertising (he has posted this just before the forum went down IIRC) and the owner of the site you are advertising had declined to provide withdrawal addresses he had withdrawn to, citing privacy for his customers.
So if you are going to be critical of anyone who "helps" moreia, then I would suggest removing your signature and criticizing the owner of the site you are advertising for
If they receive negatives from those within my trust network I will leave. My issue with the escrow I mentioned was that the account already had negative trust from one of the most trustworthy members. |
|
|
|
Quickseller had given negative rating to girlbtc.com which he removed while trying to become escrow. I would like to publicly state that I was asked to give a price on how much it would cost to escrow this signature campaign. I gave the OP a quote and I will follow up by editing this post if/when escrow is funded to pay all participants.
Since you still have one negative red on girlbtc account, so I think they will let you to be the escrow. and its removed now, it was expected already Previously, Quickseller had become escrow of a scam site which allowed them to run a signature campaign. The account already had negative rating from BadBear and they wouldn't have got any participants without Quickseller's help. |
|
|
|
Ok we ban account selling, it can't be enforced, and then it becomes more dangerous because people think it can't happen.
It can be enforced. Anytime someone proves that the account belonged to him earlier restore it. There will be those sellers who will try this, and after a few cases all the buyers will be wary. Don't give any protection to buyers, if you find an escrow doing this ban him too. Not only are you helping hidden selling of accounts, you're actively helping it by making it open and allowing escrow for it. In addition to the enforcement issue: From time to time people have asked me whether they could sell their accounts or use them as collateral because they have an emergency need for money or have come on hard times.
In that case they can do so openly. There is no need to make it hidden. |
|
|
|
Acting as escrow for a signature campaign is the opposite of "aiding and abetting" them. They are unlikely to pay their participants anything if the funds are not escrowed, Quickseller is preventing a number of people from being scammed by doing this.
This is an argument I don't get. The account was already marked by BadBear. If they couldn't get an escrow they wouldn't have been able to get the participants. Quickseller could've given another rating on top of BadBear's and made the campaign dead. Instead he became escrow which allowed them to get users and had the signature displayed across forum. It was lucky that they folded so soon, otherwise this signature campaign would've caused more damage. Protecting those participants doesn't make sense. They should've been marked for supporting a scam company, like devthedev had done earlier. Getting a reputed escrow added a certain amount of legitimacy to the campaign. To the ordinary participant, since Quickseller was with the campaign, they figured they are not doing anything wrong either. Furthermore, numerous trustworthy members have escrowed signature campaigns for scams, such as Dooglus and Mitchell with dicebitcoin.
This is not the best example as dicebitcoin didn't look to be scamming initially. A better example is Tomatocage, becoming the escrow for the account trade of KingofSports. In that he was directly helping a scammer earn some money. This is something which is accepted here for some reason and doesn't make sense to me. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
