The Account recovery team up to and including Cyrus has been helpful. My problem is i don't have a signed BTC address that i have control of. The problem the shitty core has failed me miserably several times turning corrupt and having to reinstalling a fresh new core with a new address. Last year i lost my legendary account otrkid70 because i did't change my PW after the 2015 breach. I have tried to recover the account even with the help of former Global Moderator Saltyspitoons testimony regarding a transaction that we did. Ok Fair Enough...The recovery team has little to go on and move forward with. Solution? I made a transaction selling a 10,000 Dogecoin to a user here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2700822.0 before my account was hacked. The user payed in Dogecoin to an address i still own and can verify. The address was given to the Buyer Via P.M. These P.M.s can be verified by the Admins and the address can be seen by them and verified by me. How do you know it's me and not the hacker? The hacker already has control of the account and would not be posting this. Also I.P. addresses can be confirmed by an ADMIN same now as last year before the Hijack. Still waiting. |
|
|
|
|
In WW2 we fought the Japs Germany Italians. We were allies with Russia China. We beat down Germany and Japan,Italy. We Ended the war on both fronts.
Now our adversaries are China and Russia. And we are friends with Germany and Italy.
How soon these fucks forget...without U.S. they would be speaking German or Japanese by now.
Fuck the Chinese and Russian inconsiderate Bastards.
P.S. This is not towards the people of Russia or China ...Just the Governments.
|
|
|
|
[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]
What the hell? How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling? I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts.. If i bid on an auction item and then disagree to pay i would be considered untrustworthy to hold a deal/ Not relevant/applicable here. Ofcourse it would.  ok Hitler |
|
|
|
[..] After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions.
[...]
What the hell? How did my expection to receive an PM to get the proof of ownership decrease the value of what he is selling? I didn't know accounts lose value for each PM sent... But that's probably because i don't buy/sell accounts.. If i bid on an auction item and then disagree to pay i would be considered untrustworthy to hold a deal/ |
|
|
|
One insane shooter case closed.
 This made me LOL.....R.I.P. |
|
|
|
I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him. If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid. Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this.. I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.
It is OP's problem.
I wouldn't call that scam. It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards. But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the scam-category IMO. Unethical? Yes. Unfair? Yes. Mean and misleading? Yes. But scamming? Definitely no, IMO When you said you would buy the account after he provides confidential information, you entered into a contract with him. The terms of the contract were he was to send you a PM from the account he was selling (exposing confidential information to you), you would pay him 550 and he would give you the account. After receiving the confidential information, you did not follow through on your end of the contract, and the person suffered damages in the form of decreased value of what he is selling as a direct result of your actions. The term "scam" is very subjective, but there was a written contract, the terms were violated (assuming you can not demonstrate you upheld your end of the deal), and he suffered damages. This is the criteria for a written contract flag. It is up to the person to create a flag. It's called an oral contract which he broke. |
|
|
|
You're comparing apples and oranges. Scammers make a user lose Value. Buying an account to join a sig campaign has no victims. your point is moot. Next?
too bad you can't put a price tag on someone's mental health deteriorating due to the amount of garbage he has to consume from these people who buy accounts and post detritus. Your username says it all smh |
|
|
|
You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.
Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid. you cant tell if an account is bought. you're an idiot. So.. just because it is hard to tell whether an account has been bought.. it is ok to do something which is not permitted by the signature campaign managers.. just to join such a campaign ? So.. if i am not getting caught.. i can rob a bank ?
You're too quick witted for me....i think you deserve a spot in the DT list with those other ass clowns.
He is a member of the DT1 list. Or is this some joke i don't understand?
I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him. If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid. Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this.. I kinda agree with quickseller but since I am not the one who shared those PM's I don't care.
It is OP's problem.
I wouldn't call that scam. It definitely would have been a scam if i took those accounts (he offered me to send credentials first) and not pay him afterwards. But just accepting a deal and later rescinding does not fall under the Scam-category IMO. Unethical? Yes. Unfair? Yes. Mean? Yes. But scamming? Definitely no, IMO
Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed.
It is not. People behind bought accounts are NOT to be trusted.. simply because they didn't earn any trust or acceptance in this forum. They bought an account which did.. So tagging them as what they are (simply just bought accounts, no value behind it) is not an abuse of the trust system. Selling an account is not a reason for mistrust. get a grip and go chase other ambulances. You a lawyer? |
|
|
|
You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.
And you think that's healthy for the forum? I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him. If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid. Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this.. Although, i hate people who moral high horse, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing. you cant tell if an account is bought. you're an idiot.
You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem? Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed. Scamming is also not prohibited... Is flagging scammers also abuse of the "trust" system? You're comparing apples and oranges. Scammers make a user lose Value. Buying an account to join a sig campaign has no victims. your point is moot. Next? |
|
|
|
You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses.
And you think that's healthy for the forum? I do think it is unethical to tell him that you will trade with him after he provides information, and after receiving information, you do not trade with him "prove the second, then we can do it", and to say that you will pay for something, and subsequently not pay "I pay 350 if it's good" "I pay 550 for green trust legendary ok". It also looks like you entered into a contract with the person, but it does not appear you followed through: "Ok send me message from this acc and we have deal", responding to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=167659 that is a "green trust hero member" to which you agreed to pay 550 for. I don't see evidence you paid him. If this person were to open up a written contract flag against you, it would be valid. Interesting point of view. I kind of agree here, despite these people being account sellers, was it really right to mislead them (and in a way, scam them?) as 2 wrongs don't make a right. Curious as to how other people think about this.. Although, i hate people who moral high horse, and these account sellers damn well know what they're doing. you cant tell if an account is bought. you're an idiot.
You most definitely can & what exactly is your problem? Account sales according to the rulles of this website are NOT prohibited. Flagging these accounts is abuse of the trust system. Case closed. |
|
|
|
selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.
It is not a crime. You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead. Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating? How did you get that idea? You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses. Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid. you cant tell if an account is bought. you're an idiot. I just did it for 5 accounts in this topic. You're too quick witted for me....i think you deserve a spot in the DT list with those other ass clowns. |
|
|
|
selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.
It is not a crime. You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead. Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating? How did you get that idea? You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses. Signature campaigns don't want bought accounts farmed by one person. (they clearly state that you'll get banned if you were found to multiaccount spamming) They want real individuals. So your argument is invalid. you cant tell if an account is bought. you're an idiot. |
|
|
|
selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.
It is not a crime. You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead. Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating? How did you get that idea? You ever come across the notion that people want to buy an established account to join a sig campaign instead of devoting time and bullshit establishing an account? you fuckers throwing rocks live in glass houses. |
|
|
|
selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.
It is not a crime. You'll just have to live with a red trust rating shining on your forehead. Are you threatening me with a baseless accusation trust rating? |
|
|
|
|
selling accounts is not a crime nor is it a case for the dickheads of the bitcointalk police DT users.
|
|
|
|
|
One insane shooter case closed.
|
|
|
|
As for who's territory the drone landed in, it looks like Iran possesses a lionshare of the drone wreckage of this one. That (and basic logic) adds credibility to the story that the drone had crossed into Iranian territory when the IRG popped it.
Of course it is possible that the drone either drifted into Iran's territory as it fell to earth, or that it was retrieved by Iran from international waters, but the fact is that Iran has quite a collection of U.S. (developed) drones which almost certainly were invading their territory and paid the price. They are fairly proud of their collection so it seems.
The U.S. will always claim that the drone was attacked in 'international airspace' and drifted into Iran from the North Pole or whatever. It's 'how they roll.' As a result, their declarations about locations of this and that are almost totally valueless. The sad thing is that a healthy percent of the American peeps will believe anything reported on mainstream TV. Oh well.
from the looks of it they have a recycled car not a drone. |
|
|
|
Touche. you might be right. A Mod should look at all available information 5though
Well, let's hope the mods of the Beginners and Help section read this thread and make a mental note not to move threads to the mining subforum unless they are certain the hardass mining mods are not going to toss it into the trashcan for breaking the rules. Agreed |
|
|
|
Well, one thing that I can say about the Beginners and Help section. It seems a lot more palatable to read than it was the last time I checked it. The last time I checked it is when people were demoted to newbie because they didn't have even 1 merit. It was filled with people basically begging for merit. I'm not certain if the reason it is actually worth reading now is because the mod(s) for that job have done a good job keeping it clean or if I just picked a wrong time to start reading it in the past.
Again...newbie or not a valid question was asked and deleted. This not a mistake it's an incompetent Mod. Well, I think the mod that moved the topic to mining was trying to be helpful and move the topic to where the newbie could get expert answers. Unfortunately, the mining board has rules, and this thread broke one of them. 6. All virtual mining - such as cloud mining, purchasing hashrate etc. is a service and NOT bitcoin mining. Discussion regarding cloud mining, contracts, hosting services, renting hashrate etc. belong in the economic services subforum and not the mining subsection.
Touche. you might be right. A Mod should look at all available information 5though |
|
|
|
It's a bit late to react to something from the 80s. That's almost 40 years ago...
I don't think obliterating a country is the best way to resolve anything... We could get rid of all wars tomorrow if we just obliterate the world...
It shows a negative pattern of a country that is unwilling to adapt to something more than a ruthless regime. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
