The reply by OgNasty on page one really sums it up. 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1204573.msg12644929#msg12644929

Use someone with a long history of escrowing successfully, 1 year of experience + thousands of posts + lots of drama and accusations going and coming adds up to hype, not trustworthiness.

With respect to Quickseller's long-winded, unsolicited self-defense post on page one (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1204573.msg12661093#msg12661093), I just want to point out that again and again he suggests that anyone who is rational will agree with him.  His mental model of the world doesn't allow states where he is incorrect and someone else is correct.  Much less the nuanced situations that occur constantly in life where to some extent, many people are correct in conflicting ways.  Even now, he fails to see that he's scammed countless people (well, presumably he knows the count, but we'll never know it) by collecting escrow fees from them without actually providing them an escrow.  He thinks that if you're trading with him, you deserve to pay an extra fee for the comfort his reputation is supposed to give you.  He fails to see that a rational person could actually end up in a dispute with him and that he'd be unable to provide a neutral arbiter in that context.  Alas, so it goes.

If I were going to engage in trading on here, I'd be looking for an escrow with a long history of trading, but also someone who doesn't engage in wars and defamations and accusations and who doesn't have an army of alt-shills to back them up in an argument.  Ie, I'd be looking for someone with a level-head.  You can still find these people on bitcointalk, but quickseller has never been one of them.  The thing about having a level-head is that it doesn't draw much attention, so that kinda person doesn't have 100 accusation threads against them in meta, so that kinda person isn't the first one you think of when you think of forum escrows.   I fully believe that those kinds of people are still around and that careful people can trade here safely.

Right, and usually you can, if you're a glutton for punishment, drill down into those errors and find out exactly what packages are preventing each other from installing, but in this case harcoresuperstar wasn't really advanced enough to do this.  In the end, it seems to me like downloading a precompiled binary might have been a good match for this user's level of experience and pluck.

This is basically why you should use a neutral, third-party escrow who can receive control of the account and the funds before releasing each one to the other party.

I've been away for a while and I know that for most of the last year, support from primedice was terribly impacted, so to speak.  I'm glad to hear it's no longer the case.  Tell me, did they end up hiring a bunch of new people to handle all the tickets?

Thanks guys!

Hi!  As per the op, I see that I should apply first and then add the Sig only if I'm approved.  Here's my application (thanks):

Username: tspacepilot
Current post count: 3865
Current rank: Hero
Bitcoin address:1waLNutzCh3DuwCvHcHmFgGg6vsLiWfn4

I wonder if that particular ppa isn't updated very often, if that's why the dependencies couldn't be installed (perhaps because newer versions are already installed on your system or something along those lines).  Anyway, I'm glad you got it figured out.

I'm glad to see that you got it working.  In the end, you just downloaded the precompiled binaries?

Heya james.lent, it seems like you guys have basically figured out your issues without any services from me, which is cool, I'm kinda swamped at the moment.  

About escrow: it's my opinion that a trusted, neutral, third-party escrow is crucial for protecting yourself when trading with someone on the internet.  But can you believe that some people on here have even been caught using themselves as escrow in order to fraudulently collect escrow fees from another party and to farm trust for their alts (ahem)?  Hard to believe what some people will stoop to, no?

Anyway, I don't think this thread is about escrow, so let's try to keep things on topic, shall we Quickseller?

If I recall correctly he was working backwards in time towards block 0, right?  So if someone could just remind me of approximately how many blocks he digs per unit time again ... 

Yes, I did take a closer look at your session.  I've run into this problem on debian in the past and usually it's resolved by using dpkg to do the configure step by hand, as knightdk had suggested.  If I were you, I'd look more closely at *why* the packages which is says "cannot be installed" cannot be installed.   Perhaps you get that info with "apt-get install -f"?  I can't recall at the moment.

Do you guys really not want hero members to advertize?  Or should we understand the Sr. member rate to be equal to Sr or above?   Anyway, got any spots left for me?

PM sent.

...says the dude who got caught trust-farming and setting everyone up for a long-con

Anyway, if someone wants to hire me to write a script for something, they should PM me.

That's not right.  This proposal was to force each newbie account to choose someone to trust in order to bootstrap the trust system.  You're right that if it had gone into effect, the notion of "default trust" wouldn't exist, or at least not as we understand it.  But there wasn't going to be a vote for users, the beauty of this proposal was that people wouldn't just have the matching trust lists by default which most people have at the moment.

I haven't used Ubuntu in a while but debian is my normal OS, which is similar.  Anyway, it'd be helpful if you could cut-n-paste the entire terminal sessions to either a pastebin or to this forum when requesting these kinds of help.  Oftentimes, someone who's very familiar with how the system works will see a specific detail if you post the sessions rather than just saying "it's the same message".  In any case, I'd consider ditching that PPA and just building from source.  On debian I'd get the source version of that bitcoin package and then do builddep to install dependencies.  After that you just make && make install.

Let us see some sessions, please!

Me three.

(emphasis mine, this time)

I know he's never been good at spelling the "hard" stuff, but since when did QS get a sense of humor?

Swc of course has a point thatvsome software is more complicated than others and that when you are handling other people's money, you can't afford to play fast and loose.  I, for one, always noted sealswithclubs as one of the oldest bitcoin sires that never suffered a security breach.

But what I can't understand is how the current state of affairs is an improvement over the old seals running mavens.  In the old scenario, you had a huge player base, playing on Web, Android and windows and basically ruled bitcoin poker.  In the new scene, you have a software that can only be used by a few people, is unstable, and is apparently a bitch to fix.

Can we just have mavens back so we can play poker again?

I'm not sure those properties are unique to CLAM.