Is there any proof of turtle's alleged fraudulent history, outside of the accusations you have presented thus far?

As someone who has no dog in the fight regarding turtle and yourself, it actually appears very much this way to me. OP seems to have been an honest seller for years on this forum, and you single handedly ruined his entire reputation because he made a purchase from a fraudulent buyer, while the fraudulent seller has not received any repercussions what so ever for selling stolen gift cards. While some may argue this is not grounds for a negative trust mark, I also noticed that you personally have assigned negative trust to those selling illegitimately received giftcards.

The result is you look like a giant hypocrite and promoting scamming on the forums. Your job as a default trust member is actually quite the opposite, and you appear to be grossly abusing your power.

In case anyone is curious about the bounty system, I just received my bounty for reporting a bug. The bounty was a .025 BTC promo code with a 1BTC wagered requirement to cash out.

A lot of people have this same mindset- "Right now doesn't matter. Bitcoin value only matters down the road". Newsflash, if the price isn't gradually increasing until the fabled "mass adoption", it can never take place. Bitcoin won't spike from 230 to 2300 in one day, and it can't start that movement until the price begins to increase.

So if this account was hacked, even if I were to purchase this and receive full access to all account related information, Steam support could still lock me out and potentially give the account back to the original owner?

In that case, is there any way we can get a warranty on the account if someone decides to purchase it?

Anyone who has been on this forum for a bit understands the importance of trust. With a poor trust rating, it is hard to make purchases, receive loans, and even participate in signature campaigns. For such an important factor involved, I'm surprised there aren't more concrete guidelines as to what justifies negative trust.

Obviously, doing things such as scamming is grounds for negative trust. If you take out a loan and don't repay it, you deserve the red mark under your username. In addition, it appears to be common practice in the lending section to mark accounts asking for loans without collateral as untrustworthy.

Aside from this, I cannot think of many unspoken rules. The problem I see is that there are a lot of grey area (laundering money, selling stolen goods, blackhat merchants, etc.) where most people are not given poor trust, and many even are awarded good trust. However, there are a few lucky individuals in each controversial market that are subject to the red mark of death, and they typically lose most of their business as a result.

So, is there any list of activities that is agreed upon by the default trust users as grounds for a negative trust rating? I spent a considerable amount of time looking throughout the forums, but I couldn't find a comprehensive list anywhere.

So let's say you hacked the account. If you hand over the email credentials and the password, is there any chance that the original account owner can retrieve it? Or if I change the password on the account/email, I will be the sole owner, correct? Any way the original owner can contact Steam and regain ownership?

Damn. I'm not yet sure whether I agree with the trust placed on OP or not, but I definitely don't think you deserve it. You have a very good trust history, and Quickseller decided to play detective in your dispute and deemed you the criminal, thus destroying all your reputation you had built up over the years. Sorry to see that happen to you, hopefully you can get that blemish removed in the near future.

What are the profits like from using an affiliated based signature campaign? IIRC the Xotika signature earns you money only when users sign up under it, correct? I tried doing this with Primedice for a little bit after they shut down their signature campaign. Didn't get any referrals, but maybe with a campaign for a newer and more exciting company you could get a decent number of people to join.

I think if/when a global economic crisis takes place, that would actually be incredibly good for Bitcoin. One of the major misconceptions of Bitcoin is that it's unstable and extremely volatile, when our neighbors and co-workers complain about all the money they are losing, we must simply flaunt our stable investment (Bitcoin) and surely at least some others will decide to hop on the train.

I mean, if you don't look at the bigger picture, you could argue that 2013 was the year of Bitcoin. We saw insane gains in price, acceptance, and news coverage in that year. The tail end of 2013 is when most people first heard about Bitcoin, after all.

Age doesn't matter in the realm of freelance. Act professional, provide quality services, and nobody will even question your age in the first place. If you understand programming you should look into the services section or reddit.com/r/jobs4bitcoins and reach out to people in need of some programming help.

Oh no, I don't mean holding Bitcoin at all. Just by adding Bitcoin as a payment option, companies can lose overall sales. In other words, even if you use a payment processor that transacts the purchases to USD instantly, companies will experience a loss in revenue.

I read up on it a while back, so I don't have too precise of information, but the premise was as followed: Mozilla Firefox began accepting Bitcoin donations. Donations spiked up a bit as everyone who wanted to donate with Bitcoin did at the start. Most people only donated once, and after accepting Bitcoin, donations overall dropped a bit (which was allegedly caused by a loss of credibility in the eyes of potential donators through the acceptance of Bitcoin). In other words, the small group that you could potentially win over by accepting Bitcoin is smaller than the group you could potentially lose from accepting Bitcoin.

Call me pessimistic, but I seriously doubt anything like Amazon or Ebay adopting Bitcoin would take place next year. There is currently no benefit for merchants to accept Bitcoin, and there is even proof to suggest that Bitcoin acceptance hurts sales (I believe Firefox is the one that made the study).

Anyways, we are a long ways away from mass adoption. Price fluctuation in 2016? I would be upset if it didn't, with the halving and all. However, I don't think that is enough to boost Bitcoin into the mainstream.

That's really disappointing to hear you don't care about immediate/near future success of Bitcoin. I'm personally in the same boat as you on one thing- I think long term success should be one of the biggest goals for the Bitcoin community to achieve. However, I don't see how you could expect such a feet to take place without success on a smaller scale prior to whatever your version of long term success is. For me, mass adoption is the ultimate goal, and that can't take place until Bitcoin continues to improve. The roadtrip isn't point A to point B, we have a lot of landmarks to hit before this long term success can be achieved, and it needs to take place in the near future.

Anyways, it's clear you have a concrete set of views, but there are a lot of people out there with views that oppose you. Even if you run the major Bitcoin community outlets, I personally don't believe you should have the audacity to fully censor certain points of view from your forums.


https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_uncensored/comments/3hh0ln/theymos_in_trouble_with_ftc_now_ftc_just/

Is that profit worth potentially losing it all in what has historically been a very risky field of investment? There are a lot of investment opportunities outside of cloud mining, why take the chance? Investing in a Bitcoin start up- like Augur for example, would earn a much greater ROI with a much smaller risk.

Its hard of course, but being creative truly is the only answer. The internet isn't new, and it's saturated with people all over the world attempting to do the exact same thing OP is asking about. There is no shortage of labor for online workers, and that's why all the conventional means pay little to nothing. There is a reason why there are so many "Make Money Online" eBooks flooding just about every major relevant forum.

So to summarize, being creative is the only way to earn a decent wage online, and we can't tell you what exactly that creativity is.

No offense intended, but I think you are full of shit. If USD collapses, people won't be looking for a new altcoin that can evade the governments. As I recall someone saying recently on the forums- if the USD collapses, you better be researching sustainable agriculture, not protecting your money.

I mean there is a reason behind this. A lot of Bitcoin traders use technical analysis- a strategy where you base your orders and transactions based off of actual factors (anticipating a price increase after Greece, and a decrease during XT debates, for example). In addition, you have everyone else who holds Bitcoin. Most people are hodling for years to come, but for weak-stomached investors, something bad could mean cashing out, at least partially.

I suppose that's true, but Theymos' propositions are still incredibly harsh on any change whatsoever. Blockstream alone wouldn't be able to stop any progress, but several companies with the same intentions as Blockstream could (and there are several companies with the same intentions).

Theymos obviously has some sort of self interest in the whole debate, or he wouldn't be so god damn opposed to any change at all (I mean just look at his statements on the reddit). He has a rough history (wasn't he just uncovered to be laundering money through some donation?) and I really wish he didn't have so much power in the community.