Can you sign a message from the address quoted below? I don't see anything that would qualify as plagiarism, but there are a lot short posts. I didn't look close enough to see if you were multi-posting, which could also get you banned. Payment address for winner will be as follows, thanks.
1GdgzDBwiAi9XN4Cx5Xrj5RYVDExXe3YBA
Archive. |
|
|
|
I assume it's the person who mentioned my name the most frequently, yes? The Pharmacist maybe? It would be cryptohunter, but he loves me so much that he always calls me by pet names.  Oh, I forgot about Spoetnik! She also had a thing for me back in the day. Add her to my list. 
# Friend Quotes %
1. cryptohunter 62 1.89
2. BADecker 28 0.85
~
37. The-One-Above-All 7 0.21
~
If you add CH and her alt... over two times the runner up. Should I be jealous?
Is it too late to change my guess? After more consideration I think it's suchmoon. |
|
|
|
|
I used to watch that board, not sure why. I guess like you it was fascinating to see what digital goods were available, never tried to sell anything there except some crappy domain names. For a while I would check that board everyday, but I got fed up with the sea of filth.
To an extent we have to put up with a wild west type environment, that's partially what crypto is about to begin with. Don't expect the anarcho-capitalist who owns this place to do much about it.
|
|
|
|
~
and also will not be included if it has any negative trust.
I noticed zazarb received a negative review from Lauda a couple of months ago, but his overall rating is  : -1 / +23, which officially is a neutral rating. I don't think he's a risky lender, so I think he deserves to be left on. Having said that, this thread isn't a dictatorship. If you folks want to see changes to the list, data added or removed, please speak up. Who told you zazarb is a risky lender? And the point you quoted is not for zazarb or someone who received negative trust but not showing "trade with extreme caution". I tried to make a correction that person whom post I quoted. And I think your list has no error. I wasn't implying that you had any thing to say about zazarb's rating. I was just noting that my arbitrary policy is to exclude any one with a negative rating, not necessarily anyone with a negative review. I just wanted to clarify that. |
|
|
|
~
and also will not be included if it has any negative trust.
I noticed zazarb received a negative review from Lauda a couple of months ago, but his overall rating is ???: -1 / +23, which officially is a neutral rating. I don't think he's a risky lender, so I think he deserves to be left on. Having said that, this thread isn't a dictatorship. If you folks want to see changes to the list, data added or removed, lenders added or removed, changes to the inclusion policy, whatever, please speak up. |
|
|
|
even undomesticated animals. Watch it, now. I resemble that remark. |
|
|
|
I'm counting how many times you quoted someone. I'm curious to know whom I've quoted the most, if I can play. I'll have to guess CH, but I really don't know. I would like to Foxpup to be BFF, but she doesn't even know I exist.   |
|
|
|
Any specific reasons? I'm curious to know the cause behind the denial.  You don't qualify for an unsecured loan based on my requirements for earned merit, and more importantly; you already have an active loan. Once again, I'm sorry. I can't help you. |
|
|
|
Username: 2double0
Loan Amount: BTC0.04 + ETH 0.3
Purpose: BTC for trading and need ETH to send my tokens to exchange and buy something
Collateral:None
Repayment date: 25/05/2019
Repayment Amount: BTC0.046 + ETH 0.35
Funding Address:
For BTC:
1J4YGjWGyWSQ1U8VCTUeXn3XqMxiUhheZ7
For ETH:
0x90e6298fb8265f02450c51441e1d327837ee12c5
Hi 2double0, Thanks for inquiring about a loan from me, but I'm sorry I have to deny your request. |
|
|
|
Username: sheenshane
Loan Amount: 0.04BTC
Purpose: Personal
Collateral: None
Repayment date: May 15, 2019
Repayment Amount: 0.045BTC
Funding Address: bc1qc8qpjptveqz5vv54rt9gpr5ep6x5kh7f4u8y3s
Thank you for the loan request. It has been approved and funded. Please send your payment to this address: 3MiRqZZ3y1dNqWqi4e1jkSYYPprTzns41b TxId: e504a8c4e964902b6516fa20228f7513cd37d539e3de83d9dd3234679e0f4bbd |
|
|
|
if always my account will lock i will be create new account and write here, i waiting answer for what lock two accounts?
The mods aren't likely to waste anymore time on your spammy accounts. It's now become obvious why you were banned. Multiple threads, all being spammed with one, maybe two word replies, google translated, SPAM SPAM SPAM. Also, I'll point out that you as a person are banned from the forum. All your accounts are likely to get banned once they're found out. If you post outside of this thread with your pushener account it will get banned also. |
|
|
|
I've revised my rating to neutral.
You might want to put that in your terms upfront so people don't expect positive feedback. This is what I've been doing whenever I buy or sell crypto: <snip>Also, this will be a neutral feedback transaction assuming it's successful in the first place.<snip>
If they know they won't be getting a positive feedback from you, you're more likely (I think) to get genuine offers and there's nothing left to doubt after the deal is completed. Good idea. If nothing else, it'll ease the burden of having to filter through microloan requests with the hope of getting a positive review out of it. @mdayonliner, sorry I didn't mean to derail your pity party. |
|
|
|
Your account has been autobanned not locked.
for what banned? Probably for spam. All of your recent posts are one or two words in your Tx Acceleration thread, with a few multiposting bursts thrown in for good measure. Your account has been autobanned not locked.
What's odd is I don't see his name listed in the SecLog, but I see Bpip has him listed as autobanned. |
|
|
|
Perhaps there is no need for positive trust in the microloan business at all. That's probably the best way to approach it. I don't want to overthink my impact, but it did occur to me that it can lead to abusing the trust system. A functional trust system is more valuable to me than a few pennies earned on interest. The more it gets abused the less functional it becomes. Can't remember who it was but someone was selling email addresses a while back for like $10 each and it was clear people were almost certainly buying them just for the DT feedback. TheButterZoneThat's who I was thinking of. |
|
|
|
It's actually something I'm curious about now that I'm on DT2, is this something that's going to happen more; people asking for micro-loans because they assume I'll leave them positive feedback?
Sadly, yes. Once people become aware to the fact that they can get a cheap positive feedback they'll take advantage of that. Good business for you perhaps but it'll be abused. Maybe a neutral would be more appropriate but that's up to you. Anyone who's half intelligent can see what users they can get trusted feedback from and then they'll go to those leaving them for small value deals to quickly rack up some trust for as little amount as possible. Most people taking out loans here probably don't even need them in the first place, especially when they give the same amount in collateral. Literally what is the point? Imagine going to a bank for a loan and they requested the same amount in gold or whatever. Just sell the gold. You clearly don't need a loan if you can afford to give the same in collateral. It's just a way to build up some trades and feedback and the interest is the small cost of that and one that is well worth it to them. I guess it's a flaw of the system and how people interpret 'trust' here. It's why I've suggested before that small transactions should carry little to no weight on feedback scores. Can't remember who it was but someone was selling email addresses a while back for like $10 each and it was clear people were almost certainly buying them just for the DT feedback. People shouldn't be putting so much weight on mere 'green' feedback either. Read what the feedback is for and make your own mind up. If somebody has 100 green trusts from 100 different DT users and they're all for 10 dollar deals then all that means is that they can be trusted with ten dollars, but people will trust them with a lot more if they're in the 'green' when they really shouldn't. I've revised my rating to neutral. I have excluded people from my trust network because I suspect them of condoning "trust farming" with micro transactions and low value sales. I wasn't around when the member you mentioned was selling email addresses (or was it google voice numbers?) but I do remember hearing about that and thinking the same thing. I certainly don't want the reputation of someone who's trying to sell positive reviews for any amount, whether it's pennies or hundreds of dollars. That's not my goal. |
|
|
|
~Retina account is building itself up nicely. Already got a DT trusted feedback today from a microloan I was curious about his motivation for his asking for that loan. Honestly, with all the PMs and time invested in communication it wasn't worth the effort, but hey I'm trying to build a business. I also considered not leaving any feedback, but I started thinking that would be petty of me. Just because it's a small loan, or because I suspected he's trying to build trust, or he might be Mday's alt, or whatever excuse, I figured I'd treat it like I would any other successful transaction and just call it that. It's actually something I'm curious about now that I'm on DT2, is this something that's going to happen more; people asking for micro-loans because they assume I'll leave them positive feedback? |
|
|
|
I didn't try to make a "payment" for removing red trust. I mentioned a "ransom". As English writing person, I guess, you know the difference of both words.
You told that I'm elder than you. Yes my kid, For easy understand, think on this way...
Somebody hacks your computer and tell you that "give me $100 to recover files". Is it a payment or ransom?
And did anyone actually offer to remove your negative trust in exchange for a ransom? From your initial post, it seems you're the one making the offer, which makes it a bribe, not a ransom. Not only does this make it a bribe, but it also makes it deflection of accountability. Making an unethical offer, but using words like "ransom" in an attempt to divert responsibility and obfuscate the truth doesn't make it any less unethical. |
|
|
|
How much is the ransom for removing a red trust and to whom I should pay?
The "ransom" for removal of negative reviews is not in the form of money, and the fact that you are asking is proof that you don't have what it takes. |
|
|
|
AND YOU KNOW THAT INTEREST IS HARAM!
Lol, but trying to scam someone with a worthless shitcoin isn't haram? You're the one who's requesting loans, and when you get caught trying to scam you scream haram? Shasan doesn't advertise an interest rate in his thread, if someone wants a loan from him the borrower gets to suggest a repayment amount. That's not haram. But defaulting on a loan, that's haram! Your loan repayment date has been passed. If you can't repay within 48 hours then your loan has been marked a defaulted and collateral will not be handed over. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
