Can you provide proof of where you got these?

No thanks I wouldn't be interested in those. Still buying.

I think the main problem is that the trust system has given members that haven't proven themselves responsible enough the ability to mark someone's account with negative trust, and essentially ruin the account. Even if 90% of the time the people are right, there's still a 10% rate that it will be abused. Given the weight that a trusted negative feedback carries (Warning: Trade With Extreme Caution!) it doesn't seem to me that the system would work in the long run as more and more people would start to gain this power, and it would become harder and harder to monitor and deal with.

I see a main problem is negative feedback is being given because of a personal view on things, and not having to do with scamming or potentially scamming. Even if 90% of everything is right, again it still opens up the chance for 10% abuse, which would be 1/10 times a reputable members account would be damaged. As the trust web grows it would be harder and harder to deal with this, and there's a lot of problems you could run into when removing it. In order for this to not happen I think it would be a good idea to keep the trust system in a monitored rate, where only people that have proven that their opinions are correct, that are willing to quickly correct something they did wrong, and that show the responsibility to not abuse the system and their power if something doesn't go their way or if they get mad are given the power to negative rep someone's account and have it show up on their main profile.


The Default Trust Members and people who carry the high feedback weight are like the Bitcoin Police. In a regular police force, a cop wouldn't be able to give a recommendation to someone and them become part of the team. Sure, the cop might personally know that person and know they're a good person, but they haven't gone through the process of being a cop. As more and more recommendations are given out, you'd eventually have citizens killing other citizens and making decisions that aren't really applicable to the law or what they are supposed to be doing. It would be hard to monitor because there would be so many people to deal with that finding the rights and wrongs would take more time than humanly possible. If the trust system isn't kept at a monitorable rate, pretty soon there will be newbies having more say in a situation than a reputable member who's been here for years (Which I believe is already close to what happened in Canaries case).

It depends on the country I'm sending to, normally it's around $14-$20 for $200.

Thanks, let me know if you need anything else.

Provided you with an address via PM.

@Kashnis, because you're a full member I can't accept Paypal from you. I only accept Paypal from Sr. and Hero members, and I will accept other members in certain cases. PM me if you still want it.

Awesome thread. Donated $20.00. Good luck on your mission.

I can do this anytime, just let me know.

It's good to have all the discussion in one thread or else it would probably be all over the forum as well as a lot of people claiming staff are taking sides, limiting people's opinions,, or being bias. Locking the thread wouldn't sort the issue out like it's being done now.

Thanks! Pleasure doing business with you.

Update:
Skrill is currently unavailable until further notice

Another fast and smooth trade. +1

It's not worth it to me to advertise someone's business for only .1-.2 a month so I'm looking for higher offers. Then posting details will be discussed.

I'm looking for around .4, and the post details would be discussed.

Ah my mistake, I thought I saw there was a maximum of 50 posts that can be counted but that was the minimum. I'll take that offer into consideration, still looking for higher right now.

That's lower than the earlier offer.

It's possible that if you positively contribute to the community and you don't do anything like this again, that in a few months you can message the people who left you negative feedback and they'll remove it. The point you're trying to make doesn't make sense to me, just because you don't like the system (I'm almost positive you knew how it worked or else you wouldn't of PM'ed someone on the default trust list) doesn't mean you can cheat to get an advantage. There's a process to everything, you should of made a thread about it. I don't think this guy is a scammer, but the question is, was he trying to gain positive trust to pull off a big scam?


Btw, you can create a reputation thread here - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=129.0 and have your feedback posted there and have a link to it on your profile.

Thanks for the recommendations. I'm looking for a higher price per though.

Selling my signature space, message me offers. I'm active inside and outside of the market.

You were bribing someone to add members to their trust list that they had no idea about. What did you expect to happen?

"if i can give u anything for ur helping hand to make my positive rating visible just tell me mate"

Imagine if you were running a business and someone you never met came up to you and asked you to give good recommendations to a list of people you have never met. You obviously wouldn't do it because 1) Your reputation could be ruined if they find out you're giving out fake recommendations or 2) People will come to you and ask why you recommended them and not use your service anymore.

I honestly don't know how your managing people's BTC while being so incompetent. Is it because English is not your first language? You basically set the trap and put yourself in it by messaging a default trust member asking to falsely boost your trust rating in exchange for a "helping hand", something the majority of the list actively tries to stop from happening.