Perhaps a little more on topic, I don't think they're actually postponing the sig campaign when people bump this thread. I understood the threat to be aimed at people asking "daddy are we there yet?" about when it starts.
Exactly. Though I don't think he was being serious about the week postponement per post (just like I wasn't). |
|
|
|
FYI I bought several invites from Magnavox with BTC and they were delivered right away. Thanks!
Your first and only post in two years was to vouch for this... Seems a little suspicious. For those on the fence about purchasing from Magnavox, he's definitely a trustworthy seller with super fast response time.
I bought an invitation from him earlier tonight and literally got it minutes after I paid him.
Vouches from newbs who have seemingly signed up here just to vouch for a seller are worth little to nothing. In fact, they just arouse more suspicion. |
|
|
|
|
I really cannot see many people using this nor do I think it would be a good idea for them to do so.
|
|
|
|
Shame they've not capitalised on this because it is massive free publicity for the film.
What they're doing right now IS creating publicity. Now people are going to want to see the film, just because it was "cancelled". It might be still creating publicity but they're not going to make any money from it unless or until they've got a product to sell. Hype will die down eventually. The film will likely leak at some point as well. I wonder if the Korean's have that too but obviously wouldn't release it. |
|
|
|
|
What method are you using for 'cashing them out'? You mean you're accepting them for btc? Most of these cards are bought with stolen credit cards and it's usually the people who create them by fraud that they will go after, not the little guys,but keep doing it and over time the possibility of getting in trouble somewhere down the line will rise.
|
|
|
|
|
The feedback from segvec isn't the one you have to worry about, it's the one you've now got from Tomatocage that's causing the damage. And like Eal said you'll have to try work it out with the people who left you it.
|
|
|
|
|
Probably not. Faucets are a waste of time. You'd be better off trying to earn $50 in the real world then buying bitcoins with the cash. You coild easily earn $50 on a signature deal though once you're a high enough member rank.
|
|
|
|
How is it effecting them? Being faintly annoyed? They should get over it. There is likely no solution. See my above post below, but feel free to put forward one yourself: There's no amount of restrictions that we could put in place that would stop the worst offenders. The determined ones will bypass anything to continue their trolling or spamming but we just deal with them as they come and are reported.
|
|
|
|
maybe rise the amount to pay with account created via tor
...which would ... ... affect legimitate users more.
And there's plenty of proxies and VPNs about which persistent trolls will just use without having to pay anything. |
|
|
|
|
Damn, you have a full time job as well as running PD? I thought it was your full time job. I'm sure devoting your full attention to PD will be worth it and make the site and brand bigger and better for everyone. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
They should just release it and stop being pussies. Rogen should just leak it if they're not going to show it. Shame they've not capitalised on this because it is massive free publicity for the film. Zero credible information about a terroristic threats on movie theaters or motion picture companies. No movies... movie gets shelved. The terrorists win  Exactly. This was handled really badly and all it shows is they will give in to hollow terroristic threats so it sets a really bad precedent. It's a movie, get over it (though I would like to see how America and the world would react if a film about killing Obama would be handled). |
|
|
|
Apparently it isn't against any rules: I haven't seen any offer you are describing here on bitcointalk. Can you post link to some examples?
There are good reasons to think that torac is selling hacked accounts. Selling hacked accounts is not banned by any current forum policy. Selling the accounts is not illegal as far as I know (maybe the act of hacking the accounts is illegal). I'm always reluctant to go against the forum's policy of free speech, and in this case I'm not even sure that the trades are immoral. On one hand: - The victims probably never notice. - If the victims do notice, they can probably get their accounts back without too much hassle. - There is no violence or deception involved. - torac is only selling information. Some part of me thinks that selling information can never be wrong. On the other hand, there are victims... Also, I can never know with absolute certainty whether someone is selling hacked accounts or just reselling accounts that have been given to them willingly. (Reselling willingly-given accounts is OK. The forum clearly has no obligation to enforce the terms of service for other sites. Otherwise common trades such as Steam trades or PayPal transfers would be disallowed.) This makes a ban on trading hacked accounts potentially messy to enforce. Should I ban trades that are only probably trades of hacked accounts? torac is donating a portion of proceeds from each sale back to the site, which creates a conflict of interest in acting against torac
The forum is non-profit. I don't get anything whether he donates or not. What boggles my mind is you would think after the cosbycoin hack of bitcointalk.org in 2011 that Theymos would not be receptive to this type of activity taking place on his own forum. I don't think Theymos would want someone selling his login credentials on another forum.
I wouldn't like it, but I'm not sure that selling the credentials would be immoral. |
|
|
|
Why wouldn't it be (unless it specifically stated)? DPR is the one under investigation not everyone else. I have a weird feeling that wants me to believe that there could be a connection between this and theymos not accepting ads from bitmixer. Maybe after receiving a subpoena he's afraid to sell advertisment space to any website that could be considered a money launderer in any way. Because we all know that this is one of the main reasons people use bitcoin mixers and tumblers aside of anonimity.
But if that was the case then exchanges and gambling sites would likely also be disallowed. You can just as easily mix your coins by sending to a gambling site then launder your funds through an exchange (many of which are already illegal and against US laws for not complying with AML laws and other such restrictions etc). This is the problem with not clarifying as people are worrying and being paranoid and trying to put two and two together. |
|
|
|
|
Well I still don't think we should give the account negative feedback merely for changing hands unless there is good reason to (perhaps you strongly suspect a scam). Maybe a neutral one as a warning if you're concerned would be better, but that's just my opinion. Imagine if some kid has saved up $100 or more to buy an account because he sees it as the only or best way to acquire bitcoins and as soon as he does he finds it has been ruined by negative feedback even though account selling isn't against the rules.
|
|
|
|
|
There isn't going to be a limit apparently according to Stunna, but if there was it would likely just be a maximum number of points achieved in whatever way.
|
|
|
|
|
I think he was talking in third person and saying he agrees with dogie's replies, not theymos (if that's what confused you).
|
|
|
|
That doesn't happen as much as it used to unless the account looks like it's going to be used nefariously. Some people used to leave account sellers negative on sight as well but that doesn't really happen either now.
I wasn't aware of it, thanks for pointing it out. I have some difficulties to imagine a fair use of a sold account; it always seemed to me deceiptive at least and leaving neg on sight to buyers/sellers was a good antidote. I can see why some people may find it deceptive, but that all depends on the circumstances of the individual and the account in question. I don't really find anything deceptive about someone buying and posting from GenericBitcoinUser69 to earn them some bitcoins, but would if say someone like DannyHamilton decided to sell their account and the new owner tried to pass himself off as him. Thankfully most active and respected members here are unlikely to sell their account, though of course there is always the possibility it could happen so you have to learn to stay vigilant. this practice is counter productive. It gets account trading to go further underground which makes people to be able to do more potential damage when they can buy feedback without detection
Mmm, not sure. It's clear that underground selling is unavoidable, so the selling of accounts isn't forbidden on the forum. But why we should make the life easier for them? At least, with this pratice we can stop an horde of wannabe scammers. The most dangerous ones probably act already under the radar anyway. I don't know, mixed feelings about it. It's not really about making it easier for scammers. You could argue we're also making it harder for them too. If account selling was banned it would jusy push the practice off site and without the use of escrow etc more innocent people would likely get scammed out of their money and/or accounts. |
|
|
|
|
Well, you will likely get paid depending on how many 'points' you collected and the pay all depends on how much the as to be determined points are going to be worth.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
