The question of negative trust is not addressed in the contact that aTriz agreed to and confirmed. The terms were 30-100 posts/month with alia wearing the signature of aTriz’s choice in exchange for ~$400 per month.

Looking at the terms of the contract, I don’t see any reason why aTriz should be able to back out of paying alia.

The accused have the right to defend themselves no matter how clear it is they are a scammer and no matter how bad continuing to respond makes them look. Unless the OP wants to admit he was wrong about alia (it is fairly clear to me he was not), the thread should remain open.

The separate thread about aTriz is appropriate as comments about him seem to pretty quickly get buried, perhaps this was intentional...

The other thread really should remain open until there is a resolution which has clearly not happened.

I would not trust aTriz. I don’t think it is so much about the review as it is about the vouching for the gambling script when it has been shown that he very much knew what he was doing.

I think you need a citation for this.

I am curious if she is even able to produce txid's for the transactions with nullic.

I don't think this would be a very good idea. A skype interview could quickly turn from the interviewer trying to confirm that alia really has a brother who used the forum to getting extorted if there is an alleged minor involved. Especially considering that her "brother" watched her gamble in what could have been a sexually explicit show.

She posted a picture of a MacBook that matched the description of what she was selling with her writing a post in this thread upthread. I think this is address.

The lack of proof of collateral when you tried to take your prior loan.

The misrepresentations regarding your gambling scripts (that you later corrected in this thread when called out on it).

This thread which appears as if you are trying to subtly trying to get people to engage in tax fraud (with your help).

The lack of proof of possession of the Dell laptop, although I will give you this one, even though I am hesitant to believe it was sold.

The almost certain fake investors in your naked gambling thread. This is actually a fairly major reason why I believe you are not who you say you are -- if you are a camgirl, I would understand that some people might get off on you doing this, however if you are not, then you may have been paying a camgirl to do this for you, and closing the thread will both reduce this expense, and make an appearance of trustworthiness. Also, you claim that your brother was one of your customers (WTF?). 

There are probably more.

This is probably because confirming that she is in fact a 19 year old girl with a 15 year old brother will not prove her innocence. There are still many other issues, that alone would classify her as being very shady and untrustworthy.

I think others have quoted your posts in this thread that indicate otherwise. I am not sure if you are an alt of her, if you were paid to give what was clearly an endorsement for a scam, or some other shady dealing, but in any case you have shown yourself to be untrustworthy.

Very interesting logic you present here...

I had not previously drawn the connection between purchased accounts and signature campaign managers. (I do know in the past, what were very clearly purchased accounts were used to manage signature campaigns of various projects, likely run by those behind the project, some successful, some less successful, and some shady)

wtf? lol?

Honestly, at this point you might as well give it up. Your reputation is pretty much gone as far as I am concerned. Further (immediate) attempts to legitimize yourself are only going to make you appear more like a scammer.

Lol. Noted.

If a valid transaction does not get confirmed after 72 hours of being broadcast, it will be because the tx fee was too low. Including transactions that will never confirm (because the tx fee is too low) means the estimate will be lower, not higher.

That argument also ignores the potential for users to rebroadcast their transactions after xx time, which is often sufficient to get a transaction "unstuck".

I don't see your 9/10 times disclaimer anywhere in your thread. Nor is that stat correct assuming a 1% house edge (most likely, and assuming there are not any kind of YOLO-type bets )

I did read your thread. You were implying there is a short term advantage to using your script.
That quote is also not in the OP, and was in response to someone pointing out that what you were claiming to offer is impossible.

Lauda's go to answer for anyone critical of him is that they are an alt of QS. If you look through his history he will never give a straight answer (at least publicly, where he can be called out) to concerns that people bring up.

There are plenty of gambling strategies that have high probabilities of producing returns in the short run. This does not however change the odds in any way, which is what you are representing.

---

edit: I still want to see evidence of possession of the coins you claimed to have for collateral for the loan, as of when you opened that thread.