I'd say leaving a positive trust after a good transaction is appropriate. It can be always be changed as in OP's example of an account being bought.
whom are you trusting the account or the guy ? with whom are you trading the person or the account ? If you got to know that badbear is the escrow from a newbie account and quickseller is an escrow from badbear's account whom would you choose to stay safe and not to get scammed ? stay logical ,you will be respected always. |
|
|
|
I believe we trust in a person, not the account they post from.
If an untrustworthy person creates a new account, their negative trust should follow them to that account.
Cannot agree more, and why are you so offended if someone doesnt give you +ve trust for the loan dude ? Moreover we all know your aqccount is a bought account, and someone earlier claimed and proved it, so can you prove that it was not a bought account, yes or no ? If its a bought account, I myself will too add a -ve trust to you. By giving trust we trust the body we are dealing with not the IP or the account, we trust the person not the materials. can you please make it more clear mate ? if its possible then I would be glad to clear your doubts. |
|
|
|
Why exactly do you have this individual in your campaign, he hasn't added his signature correctly. probably he wont be paid for that mistake. I hve Pmed him to correct it though. NOTICE
Don't modify or remove the signatures. we check all members preiodically .
if we find that you have no signature and wrong singnature, there will be no payment, and your user name will be deleted from our list.
|
|
|
|
Well I'll throw this out there. I'll pay back 0.1 before new year. That's 4.42%
don't you think its too much hassle for 0.005 ? and you are not sure of the repayment date which takes away some percentage of lender's comfort. |
|
|
|
Well I've got loads of stuff that I can 'Ship through the mail'. But by that time I could just go and retrieve my cold storage. Just looking for a quick loan here to make a purchase. It's not a lot of money and I'm good for it. What more can I say than I am a trustworthy and respected member on this forum and I wouldn't want to spoil all that over fractions of coins.
how much time and repayment to be exact ? |
|
|
|
New cyptocurrency community needs some testers and feed back people, free premium lifetime memberships for whoever gets on board right away, 20-25 people. email me at cpo@creatacurve.com or msg me here, J would like to know some more details. I would give some honest reviews if it's interesting. |
|
|
|
A bought account should be treated like a newbie account, with the same rules you would apply to a newbie account. If someone gave a neutral rating saying that the account was bought then all ratings after that rating might be taken into consideration to find out the character of that person.
It's not that a bought account is generally untrustworthy.
I believe we trust in a person, not the account they post from.
Thanks for the feedbacks , after spending years on forum i have faith/trust in handful of people and they have shown their integrity once again. If an untrustworthy person creates a new account, their negative trust should follow them to that account.
correct, like we neg-rep the alt accounts of scammers/extortionists. :p |
|
|
|
Thanks
always quote the transaction ID... then confirm if you received and say thanks. |
|
|
|
sure i'll be back to you on 19th , thanks god you are helpful. |
|
|
|
I'm finding this a bit difficult to follow,
no problem. Read the thread once more;) but if I'd left any trust + or - on an account that I later found out was sold, then I'd remove it completely because it was only relevant to the original owner, not the account itself with an unknown new owner.
I am the original owner whom smooth left a + and i am the one who loaned from smooth . The account is not sold after the feedback was given but a long ago. I can't see any trust whatsoever left for you by Smooth, what is the big deal here?
He will probably update it later and maybe have a look at this poll before updating. |
|
|
|
If smooth does, you should talk to them and not ask for other opinions.
I have done, but the the number of people agreeing to this poll might influence him or give him the surety to take the stand and explain/present it when required.
I can only give you my view.
That is why i pmed you and still waiting for one .It's poll. To boild it down: Trying to influence others on DT is not ok, unless it is done with arguments. Those on DT should give the ratings they think are deserved and should be free to change their mind. I m not influencing from my side ,i m told that it will be influential . |
|
|
|
If smooth does, you should talk to them and not ask for other opinions.
I have done, but the the number of people agreeing to this poll might influence him or give him the surety to take the stand and explain/present it when required.
I can only give you my view.
That is why i pmed you and still waiting for one .It's poll. |
|
|
|
Let me make one thing clear again that i am not accusing nor against smooth and people are ignoring that. IMHO its perfectly fine to change a rating at a later time if new information are available. Lets say you are happy with a trade and leave a positive feedback.
In summary, for people who previously had many positives and no negatives:
- The first negative rating defines a border between pre-controversy and post-controversy.
- Don't move this border unless you have a really good reason. If you must add more info, leave another negative or neutral rating.
- If you agree with the border-negative, leave a negative rating.
- If you disagree with the border-negative, leave a positive rating responding to the negative, even if you already have a positive rating for that person. Don't delete your old rating. You should also consider excluding the inaccurate-rater from your trust list.
Now you find out that the account was bought and you think that buying accounts is about the worst thing one can do here.
There was already an inclined text feedback on my profile from KWH even if we assume smooth might have ignored/missed then why would he agree with me on the positive one ? but the point is he shouldn't/couldn't risk his reputation by giving trust to me cause other DT people will be more than happy to remove him from DT or create unnecessary complications for him . I assume someone has pmed him bout this or maybe not but in any case i wouldn't care to know about it cause they definitely lack logic in their mind. Why should you not change your rating? you could and i got no problems if he wants to but changing because of other non-logical people is what i am speaking about Should you add a negative instead? A negative cause you ignored the previous trusted ratings and realize/observe/notice it after weeks ? i might want to know how come you get to that conclusion. Account Sale : people who hate account sales only leave a neutral most of the time and negative if the account is highly trusted and a significant amount of coins can be scammed. However giving positive/negative/neutral for account sales is off-topic here. Apparently for smooth its important to give out only a few ratings that have an impact.
If he cared to give me a positive before based solely on his own opinions then the feedback had an impact. |
|
|
|
Twitter account: https://twitter.com/NuereligionBitcoin Address: 1LmhyMwy2gBPjA15EL3cBi9R14jfUYAgf1 Weekly Bonus: No enroll me ,I will make bet if i get accepted. |
|
|
|
yeah but i ain't speaking for the red but the thing is we all know it is only for the high payment and nothing to do with the scam and i cannot ignore that fact .
It's fine to make them Red for now but it shouldn't be visible forever , must be changed to neutral if the removed the sig regardless of the payment received cause if the user is not wearing any scamming sig then what are you warning newbies for ?
If they are getting punished just for the extra coins they tried to earn and had no intentions to scam then i wouldn't agree with that at least after seeing all the sig drama.
I have not updated this here, but yes I will change the rating to neutral once the signature is gone. yup that would some wise and rightful decision from your side , or else the users would be pissed as hell for joining it . I would have my doubts about this. This is a clear scam and users who wear this signature are doing so for money knowing that others will lose theirs. If they are willing to affect other people's money as long as they earn some themselves then I would think they won't have problems in the future being untrustworthy again. I would not trust someone who does that. Besides warning newbies not to invest on this site now that negative trust would be a warning to deal with extreme caution with people willing to promote a scam site to earn some coin. I will check the participants of this signature campaign and will add negative trust permanently unless they desist immediately before receiving their payment. I don't think anybody is stopping you to ? it was just our discussion and maybe we agreed cause are like minded  The above explanation in the thread is more then clear for anyone to understand what the situation and condition is,there are no higher rank's or quality posters involved and even if any accusations arise in near future then most likely they are gonna get ignored. |
|
|
|
Dont bite the hand that feeds you.
you are not having the right attitude here and is so not impressive , what makes you think you are feeding people here ? you are paying people for their service and not even giving some tips to people who make more then the required amount of posts then how come you get to such conclusions ? Stunna gave people an opportunity to earn at least 10x your campaign and has never been such childish,arrogant or should i say frustrated ? This is known as feeding --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1201497of course the guy might be doing it for promotion but still he doesn't says such baseless and incorrect statements to the community. I know majority of the people wouldn't care about what you said above cause they are lacking self respect and integrity and you are the Admin but even an uncountable number of such puppets couldn't make your above said words right/correct. If you feel that it is unreasonable to have 1 business day for calculating and processing my signature campaign, then please remove yourself.
You keep track of BTC price and lower the rates whenever you want to,you set the limit to posts and follow the rules dead serious no matter how many people ask you to increase but the one thing you fail at is at the payment and you expect people to accept that just because you have reasons ? you hired a manager he could pay people in such situations ? If people are following the rules of the campaign then you couldn't/shouldn't break them whenever you want to and No, reasons are not exceptions. |
|
|
|
Most likely due to line break, happens often probably ,but it is upto the lender to proceed or not , there isn't any risk involved in taking the account as collateral. |
|
|
|
Okay we wait for another escrow. Ignore the PM I sent to you.
Till then sign a message in this format with address https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg12174323#msg12174323I am <borrower> taking loan of <amount> from <lender> with my bitcointalk account as collateral. I will pay back xx in within x days. Today is <date>. If I default <lender> will be the new owner of this account. Edit : You just pmed me your password but I haven't changed that You still need to sign this message My bitcoin are ready to send Address: 1LQVvaqnbxTekscDbBboAARwEySorNksaW Message: I am SwingFirst taking loan of $30 from xinzark with my bitcointalk account as collateral. I will pay back $35 on December 23rd 2015 or $37 between December 24-28th 2015. Today is December 14th. If I default xinzark will be the new owner of this account. Signature: H2lPUlZSVTAYkfs22RZCfLnTR1oLpSM4y2p9cQaP4XR2ONKIJraR0F4YAwuYDwDfz/FvqNQeG69lYrIVaNyL9yE= The signature is verified at --- https://static1.blocktrail.com/BTC?verifysignedmessage=1but couldn't verify it on coinig. |
|
|
|
They're just advertising. When MSN/AOL advertise a car as being top of its class in reliability, and then it has a recall due to reliability issues, do you think they should also be charged since they are making a false claim, leading people into buying something they shouldn't?
Shorena (and others) stated that those negs will be removed, if they remove the signature (and don't get paid for it).corrected something that was supposed to , you should not leave more than neutral to someone who is signaturing solely for the attrctive payouts ... ignoring the logic is also some kind of misbehavior or not rightful. A neutral rating is only helpful if someone checks the history. A negative rating is easier to spot and check. yeah but i ain't speaking for the red but the thing is we all know it is only for the high payment and nothing to do with the scam and i cannot ignore that fact . It's fine to make them Red for now but it shouldn't be visible forever , must be changed to neutral if the removed the sig regardless of the payment received cause if the user is not wearing any scamming sig then what are you warning newbies for ? If they are getting punished just for the extra coins they tried to earn and had no intentions to scam then i wouldn't agree with that at least after seeing all the sig drama. I have not updated this here, but yes I will change the rating to neutral once the signature is gone. yup that would some wise and rightful decision from your side , or else the users would be pissed as hell for joining it . |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
