To summarize my last reply; Just don't do it. It's not worth it as you are potentially aiding scammers and signature campaign abuse and as you can see people are already sick and tired of the signature campaign abuse which is going on.

Heed SaShiRaJaVu advise too. Without using a escrow your likely to get scammed yourself, and no escrow these days are going to help the sale of accounts.

Is it allowed by forum policy? Yes. You won't get banned for selling/buying forum accounts. Although, that being said you will receive red trust from DefaultTrust and other members for doing it just as you've found out here.

Forum accounts were sold a few years ago and it wasn't too much of a big deal then. People did scam with them sometimes, but others just used the accounts to avoid ranking up issues which I believe theymos stated at some point he wasn't against the idea of this happening.

Although, nowadays it's a much bigger problem. Account sales are almost always used for either scamming, signature campaign abuse, or they have been hacked from the database leak a few years back. So if you are asking whether you can get banned for trading in accounts then the answer is no. But, this doesn't mean you should trade in accounts as it's highly frowned upon by the community and a select few actively look from sold accounts. In fact there's now a password/email change log that I would bet that a few users are downloading and watching out for suspicious activity on accounts.

I don't really care if someone is pro Bitcoin Cash and claims it's better than Bitcoin. Bitcoin Cash may have it's uses it's the fact that there's clear manipulation and misdirection going on here.

Interesting. I don't really normally take notice of Roger Ver and his manipulation techniques, but it's interesting to see a graph which highlights that when it's a down trend of Bitcoin cash he makes public claims I assume that Bitcoin cash is Bitcoin. Although, I'm assuming that this misdirection over at his website is a new addition into his propaganda.

Sounds like a unnecessary risk and potentially illegal if you aren't paying for the electricity. If you want to mine then the best way of going about it is to setup the perfect environment so the equipment is both safe from theft (which I doubt a public place would be), and safe from the elements.

This reminds me of when the school teacher was using the computers in his department to mine Bitcoin back in the early days. I believe he got caught but, can't recall on what actually happened and whether any actions were taken against him. I imagine he lost his job at the very least.

Strange one I used to use Private Internet access a few years ago. Seems a little odd that they would employ him as a chief technology officer given the circumstances he's in and what he has previously been associated with him.

I'm not sure on alternatives I remember PIA having some good policies and having no logs if I remember correctly. But, if you don't want to use them because of this then I'm not really too sure on good alternatives that provide the same service that PIA did. It depends on what you want a VPN for too. Will using Tor browser suffice for you?

I wouldn't put it pass them that they don't even know it exists and just want to know where they can earn their money and how. I don't look at the newbies section very often but, it's clear that most of the posts there aren't about Bitcoin at all rather they are about airdrops and ICOs.

Plus, these types of ICOs and bounties don't require you to be a certain rank and they encourage spam around the forum. So even if they know about merit they probably don't care as long as they can spam and get their tokens...

It's currently being spread around twitter, and multiple people are trying to spread awareness that this is misdirection by Roger Ver. Although, this might fool some people Roger Ver has got the lose the remaining credibility that he had before attempting this. (thats even if he had any...)

Is this a recent thing or has this been like this for a while? I don't visit his trashy political movements.

The third rule is never  talk about fight club.

Honestly though, it isn't easy to get banned. The rules are pretty simple and common sense, and if you don't understand any one of the rules you can ask in mpreps (linked by bitperson) thread rather than opening a new topic. In most cases your posts will be deleted rather than receiving a ban right away which means you should heed these as warnings. Unless, you continuously  break the rules you shouldn't run into an issue, and when your replies do get deleted you should think about why they've been deleted and refer to mpreps guide.

You are assuming that everyone who has insightful posts, or interesting opinions actually hold Bitcoin. I would think that a few people here aren't even holding any coins and are interested in the technology behind Bitcoin or maybe it's motivations. Pay to post probably isn't the way to go about this.

Users shouldn't have to be restricted and made to jump through hoops to post and contribute. Instead something needs to be done about the core problems such as the spam, bounties and what ever else is an issue currently. Signature campaigns are a benefit, and I would support the idea of making it a payment only benefit just like hilariousandco suggests.

I must admit going through some of the sections is sort of like wading through the local sewers. I think the beginners section has always been a little iffy in quality as your going to get basic questions there all the time, but with the recent ICO hype there's more users over there wanting to know about ICOs than Bitcoin.

Serious discussion seems to be working as intended. Some good topics popping up and some thoughtful replies. Technical support and Development and technical discussion has always been a good place for insightful replies too. If you are looking to reward newbies specifically though your going to need to go and wade through the cesspool.

Moderators don't deal with this sort of stuff It's only theymos and cyrus who can actually recover the accounts. Although, it's probably a good idea to get someone else to pitch in as judging by meta recently many people have been waiting for as long as you have been. Though, I guess these things take time to investigate and make sure that it's being given back to the rightful owner. A signature probably is only a prerequisite and more in depth investigations are likely taken out on the account.  

The only thing you can do for the time being though is bump this every 24 hours, and keep sending the message to cyrus every week or two.

Before we start looking at the general opinion of the blockchain and it's adoption by companies and public sectors, why do you think it's a negative for Bitcoin and it's community?

The blockchain is a ground breaking technology which I feel could be utilized in many different companies/governments. It's the perfect system to hold public records. If the government adopted this sort of system to record their records then this would be one of the most groundbreaking things to have happened and results in more transparency to the people.

Bitcoin core! That's funny. It's annoying such propaganda and misleading terms are sitting on the domain Bitcoin.com, but anyone who is seriously interested in Bitcoin and does their research will soon know that Roger Ver has been trying to push his agenda via misdirection for a very long time now.

I guess we have to rename the forum to bitcoincoretalk.org

I've seen a few people applying for signature campaigns that merit the post they are applying for, because they think that will get on the good side of the campaign manger. It's not a huge issue I guess because they are just giving away merit and won't likely acquire many more because, it seems it's these very same people who do the majority of the poor quality posts.

Signatures on all of your alt accounts? Okay, so you were spamming because of that then. People see spamming as an annoyance normally, but if you have a signature attached to each one of your alt accounts then it becomes a little more scummy as pointed out by actmyname.

Yeah, at least you are self aware. I may have been a supporter before the merit system was introduced, but we do have better alternatives now. Besides, the trust system isn't moderated and doesn't have any strict rules it's up to you what you leave feedback for.

It's not really kissing the his arse though. You should be looking to improve your post quality especially when you were aware that you were spamming. Multiple accounts are fine. Like I said that isn't the issue here it's that you were spamming. Should The Pharmacist leave negatives for people who spam? I'm conflicted in that, but it doesn't matter. Everyone uses their own diligence when leaving feedback. If people agree with the majority of his trust then they'll likely keep him in their trust lists. I would rather report users like you and let the staff decide what to do as this isn't what the trust system was designed for, but that doesn't mean he's out of his rights to leave you that feedback.

May I ask if you were aware you were spamming then why were you doing it? What's to gain? You don't rank up by posting nonsense anymore.

Yeah, I also tried to find the source but, my research yielded nothing albeit it wasn't a very thorough search.  When quoting in this instance it's annoying to that people tend to paraphrase rather than say what the quote actually said. Yeah, I assumed that's what is for taking a dig at and  he likely hinted at this more heavily, but if this was a serious question/interview then I would like to think he went into depth about the question rather than vaguely hinted at it. People need to know the downsides rather than having it encrypted by this statement.

I would disagree about details important for those who are familiar though. I think it's the opposite. People who are familiar with Bitcoin would know what he's hinting at here. Like me and you jumped to the conclusion he was referring to the counterfeiting issue. Those who aren't familiar with it though aren't going to jump to the same conclusion and it would become lost in translation. People who don't know about Bitcoin aren't going to know it can't be generated out of thin air. In fact you see the non informed often bring this up by saying "Bitcoin comes from nothing".

What are you even on about there's no way of having an actual logical discussion with you is there? "if you don't want spam you shouldn't be logged in" is probably one of the most idiotic statements I've heard in a while. You say that like it's a right that spam is allowed on the forum. What you did was unacceptable. You also went the wrong way about this if you improved your post quality and didn't spam The Pharmacist may have removed the feedback. Honestly, it's a fat chance of that happening now.  

I would wager that multiple people here on the forum would vouch that The Pharmacist has done good for the community.

If The Pharmacist did have alt accounts it wouldn't mean much unless he was abusing signature campaigns, bounties, scamming, spamming or any other shady behavior on those accounts. Alt accounts are allowed, and in some instances can be useful. For example, accessing the forum via a non secure connection.

It isn't the fact that you have alt accounts that was the problem. It's the problem that your just posting shit all over the place with them. I'm not a big fan of leaving negative feedback for spammers as that's more of a forum issue than a trust issue, but trust isn't moderated and anyone even if they are DefaultTrust can give feedback for what ever reason they want.

I still stand by generating private keys on a offline computer running a live cd/usb version of Linux. But, hardware wallets have proven to be enough for the general user when they need to access the funds regularly. Although, this doesn't mean you shouldn't keep things tight when it comes to security.