His Skype and ICQ are available on his profile, perhaps you should try contacting him through those.

What price? Also, I saw you sell CS:GO keys, what price are you selling those for?

I don't use skype.

PM'd you regarding 3 $50 Steam codes.

Not sure if you're asking whether people would be interested in using or buying this software. I would be interested in both, although the price would need to be reasonable for the second option.

I would like to buy a code from you if you are willing to use escrow/send first, let me know if you're still selling.

I don't think it would be too difficult to make this section hidden from those who are below Member, assuming SMF is similar to other forums I've been on. Anyone asking for a loan elsewhere would most likely be an alt, since any actually new users wouldn't know about a hidden lending section. That being said, I doubt the staff would do this, since they don't moderate for scams.

I think it would be interesting to make a poll and see whether a majority of users favor a ban or not. I'm guessing they wouldn't, since most people have a financial incentive to keep the current system in place.

Reform will only happen if the staff makes an executive decision to do so, despite the fact that the amount of spam this creates should be disturbing to all users. I'm honestly surprised by how little this bothers people, there is no question that an increasingly large amount of posts are being made by people who are being paid to do so. Paying people to post inevitably leads to a level of discourse that is inane and disingenuous, ask yourself why anyone would want to join and stay a member of a forum like that. Giving users the option to hide signatures would not fix this problem, since the problem is the low quality posts people make to display these ads, not the ads themselves.

One thing I will say in favor of sig campaigns is that they give accounts value. People here are desperate for easy BTC, and sig campaigns provide a decent source of income. People are less likely to try and scam now that they have another option to make some BTC. Those who would otherwise try and scam can just sell their accounts if they no longer care about their reputation, which is a good thing for the forum. This is an unintended consequence of sig campaigns, but it is worth mentioning.

Slow down there ruru 

But then you have to pay it back 

I already have an offer for 75%, I might take it if no one can supply at this price. I can easily buy keys for 1.65-1.7 and sell them on the market. Even with the 15% market tax, I am getting steam funds at roughly 75% of their face value, and I don't really need to worry about keys being carded like I do with codes, so it isn't worth the extra risk unless I'm getting more of a discount. Hope that helps explain the price I am offering.

I've bought for lower here with no issues before. No one will buy these at full value, wallet funds can only be cashed out through items like keys, which sell for about 65% of their value. I would also be interested in someone buying me items directly off the market, but because of the 7 day trade limit, this would only be if the BTC/usd price was locked into the exchange rate of the day we make the trade, not the end of the 7 day period. The funds would preferably be held in escrow during this 7 day period.

Looking to buy steam wallet codes @ 65% of their face value (ie. $20 code for $13 BTC).

Willing to use escrow, looking to buy up to ~ 1 BTC worth if you have rep.

As long as the OP is willing to use a trusted third party escrow chosen by the buyer, what is the risk? I agree that the OP seems shady, but he has proven ownership of the BTC he is trying to sell, and assuming he agrees to use escrow, why shouldn't people do business with him? Refusing to buy his coins won't make him pay back anyone if this is in fact Marc. As long as the buyer exercises proper caution, they are not at risk in my opinion.

You shouldn't be reporting posts just because you want to become a mod, you're helping maintain the forum with what you're doing already. The truth is, as long as the reports you make are being dealt with in a timely manner, there isn't much of a reason to expect anything to change. Reports are fairly straightforward to handle and it seems like all the non-local sections are pretty well maintained at the moment.

Also, speaking from experience, those who actively try to become mods don't usually make very good ones. Surprisingly, those who don't consider it until they're offered the position make the best ones.

Hufflepuff was paid, he was the reason the max bet limit was cut in half. Robinhood blatantly cheated (won every roll) and was only able to cash out 40 BTC out of the 2000 he "won".

I have filled this loan.

TXID: https://blockchain.info/tx/86b0b57c54647059493827a80c881ac33b81fa0bdb71be1145f95942956907a9

Repay .055 to 1Khe56BLQTn9MnRiLiKKMfsdKJ4AgGep7S on or before March 12th. Please save this address off-site in the unlikely event that bitcointalk goes down in the next few days.

I would also appreciate if someone would quote this post as proof.

This is my point, as you said earlier:


What you are offering is exactly the type of loan you say no one should invest in, BTCJAM does little to protect investors. I'm just trying to help you understand why you've received such a skeptical response here. Good luck with your project.

What collateral does BTCJAM hold that can be sold to recoup investors' losses in the case of your default? ID is not considered a valid form of collateral.

This isn't entirely true, xDeathwing was pretty much demoted for scamming. Technically, theymos said it was for his conduct related to the incident, not the scam itself, since it wasn't clear whether or not he actually owed anything. Regardless, I think most people would agree that scammers by definition are untrustworthy, and it would be unwise to allow one to remain part of the staff. This all being said, there is a difference between a scam accusation and a credible scam accusation, which most of the accusations against staff usually are not.