I added a temporary negative feedback to try and add an additional warning, I will remove or convert to neutral if you prefer.
I've also left a neutral feedback for the time being, so people get noticed about it and this thread.
Any idea where/how your account got compromised? |
|
|
|
I have a feeling that i have been scammed, should DT members do something in this case?
Sounds alot like you indeed were. Went ahead and left a (temporary) negative feedback on the account, posting here to keep track of the discussion. Let's see how this one plays out.
He just reset his password at: 9:24:34 PM, so this my account got hacked is fake.
After getting the loan his account password changed, he is busted.
Maybe that password reset was to lock the hacker out of his account, not to "fake a hack". |
|
|
|
@ThirstyMoon and traderbit, open a scam accusation thread asap if not already done.
We need a DT member to tag bitmarket.io account.
Already done, let's see how this one plays out.
On a side note, there's been several reports of "hacked accounts", whilst the original owners still had access recently. One worth pointing out is wheelz1200, who tells a similar story. |
|
|
|
Alright, since you're going with this, can you instead sign any quoted addresses from your BiPolarBob account? Take your pick between this one, this one or this one. You can sign any message so long as it is dated with the current date. Or, have you forgotten the password to your wallet too?  Nonono, he's got a way better excuse for that, he simply never reuses addresses. Maybe he will tell you he deletes the private keys once he used an address  (Would quote you the post from BiPolarBob4, but it seems that account got nuked ) |
|
|
|
-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- My account Dorrittulx has been hacked/lost. Please reset the email to scammer@live.com. The current date is May 12, 2016. -----BEGIN SIGNATURE----- 16yNXsqjyqmFbWT5zRRAYDAZvEopme71f7 Hxto9YZFzIqy403ARZNQqnmgIN16b5rBj+Xo7PSTPveQdqniPuCm9qAOFx09Y9i7HPM05yt4Ief1RDGTZ9IRFRA= -----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- . Someone trusted has permission to mark it with red.
You probably wouldn't consider me as "someone trusted", however, I went ahead and left a negative feedback on the account.
May 11, 2016, 12:40:17 PM - Dorrittulx - password changed |
|
|
|
Don't you think negative feedback will affect your trust rating if nothing is done about it?
Nope, negative feedback, as long as coming from people who are not on DT, won't affect your trust rating on default settings, hence it's not worth going after the ones that leave it, as they mostly won't cooperate with you anyway, and no-one else will get involved (feedback is not moderated, period). |
|
|
|
|
You're aware that you won't be abled to set an avatar for your account until you are a full member (at 120 activity), right?
Never mind, nice potential account you've got yourself there.
|
|
|
|
|
Würde auch so 5-10 Stück nehmen, falls ein Gruppenkauf zu Stande kommt.
|
|
|
|
I think is stupid to scam someone for 0.05BTC if your account is a green sr member
It's stupid to scam for any amount with any account, but besides that, untrusted feedback doesn't magically turn your account into a "green sr. member", regardless if it comes from a +20 guy or not. |
|
|
|
Satoshi Nakamoto would be pretty disappointed about this. Next time you register a domain, double check the spelling first.
|
|
|
|
Ye, it looks perfect but still i see those red lines.  Guess what: You might get even more of them in the future. There's (almost) nothing you can do about them. If you check the feedbacks of others, you will see, most users got some questionable feedbacks of that sort. |
|
|
|
There is no rule against no collateral loans, so I asked.
There is no rule against scamming aswell, maybe you should try that some day Technically Vod has no right to leave that fucking reputation.
Technically, Vod had every right to leave any fucking feedback he wants to, because that's how the trust system works. You don't get to say who is allowed to leave feedback over what, that is still up to each and everyone themselves. |
|
|
|
eh.. what is this?
Looks like someone being accused of having alt accounts (via untrusted, negative feedbacks), taking the situation way more serious that they have to.
@OP: I've been 'accused' of being an alt account to mexxer-2 more times than I can count (other accounts on that list are shorena, james.lent, Quickseller, and so on). Just today, I've gotten a beautifull feedback saying the following: Has many alts account. He buys his account and uses them to abuse feedbacks. Has given more then 50 negative feedback to random people.
Needless to say, all those 'accusations' neither had any base to stand on, nor provided any proof for the so-made connection. Yours seems to be the same, someone wanting to get back at you, seeing no better option than randomly connecting you to other accounts. I'd not give a single shit about that, if I were you. |
|
|
|
Does vouching work the same here as it does on TwoplusTwo?
No, it doesn't (asuming from what you've described). Generally, a 'vouch' just means, that the user tests something and writes a (brief) review about the article/method. Often, those aren't even trusted/established users, and many times, those vouch reviews are shitty (imo). IMHO, most of the vouches are just cheap (free) ways to get the product, rather than having any meaning behind them. Meaning that if the person runs off you will pay for the loses.
The only thing you stand to lose is your reputation, and these days, even that could go untouched when 'vouching' for shitty service #123. (Note: Generally speaking, not related to FruitsBasket and this case, as I think it's something special) Besides that, it would be hard to enforce a rule like this on vouches over here, and to determine the loses for what it's worth.
(Changed title, now hope he reply's)
Won't change shit, as he didn't "use trust incorrectly". There are only very few, limited ways to do that, and the way KWH left trust was not "incorrectly". You might disagree with their opinion, but that hardly makes someones opinion incorrect. |
|
|
|
Unbelievable.. I just need a fucking loan
We're not the red cross or some other charity. There are rules and requirements (most) lenders go by over here. can no one tell I'm desperate and a honest guy.
From a few posts? Not really, nope. Could be either way, but I'm not going to take the risk about being wrong. Also, too much already has happened for anyone to be willing to easily take their chances with anyone just so. I wouldn't be working so damn hard to scam somebody.
You're new, you don't have seen too many, but believe me, there's almost no limit in how many preparation/effort some scammers would put into stealing as little as they can get. It's sad, but that's the reality. |
|
|
|
I don't see how my paypal isnt collateral when there is 100 dollars just sitting on the account
You could easily reclaim the account via social engineering/support, claiming it has been hacked/stolen. A lender would have a hard time liquidating the collateral in case you default on him. Both quite good reasons not to accept the collateral you offer. |
|
|
|
you can see the bet was made before deadline
You mean the one closing in roughly 40 minutes? If other, you would have the ability to predict bets being placed in the future, which would be pretty cool aswell, tbh.
time's up?
What does 40-6 give you? |
|
|
|
IMO KWH's ratting is written with poor English
Read it again, understand the structure of the comment, while it's written shortly and compressed, there's nothing wrong with the language he uses. Besides that, that shouldn't be the base upon valuing trust ratings. (Your rating is written in bad english, it's invalid and what you say is wrong./That user has perfect, good english, he surely can't be lying about what he says.) it will be negligible very soon if you satay fair with others, of course
While the others (with which op 'stood fair') are not on DT, KWH is. As a result, without OP getting a 'counter' or unrelated positive feedback from another person on DT or without KWH being kicked from DT (which I think is unlikely to happen), OP will stay at -2: -1 / +0 (for default settings). tl;dr: trust scores don't magically 'negligible' themselves.
Ofc, that's a problem when your signature campaign kicks all users with negative trust ratings (or at least doesn't pay them). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
