The value decreased when you disclosed the confidential information.
Which itself has nothing to do with the 'contract'. What is the 'confidential information' in your eyes ? The only thing which is 'confidential' is the PM i received. And this PM itself did not decrease the value. The fact that i called him out for doing shady business is what decreased the value. And ONLY if you really want to call it like that. Because the accounts had no real value. They were sold for a price. That's it. But the real value was close to zero.. it is just some shitty account which is being traded. No value behind it. By the way.. i don't have a problem with tagging account sellers and their accounts. Even if they 'lose value'. I know that sounds harsh to someone who owns multiple accounts.. but it is the truth. It is the exposing the information he gave you that caused the damages. In conjunction with your not following through on what you said you would do causes the flag the person could create to be valid. If you want to go around damaging the value of what other people are selling, I think that is kinda sleazy, but go ahead and do that, just don't fail to follow through on your obligations in the process. The offer does not expose a person to liability. In order for an offer to obligate the person making the offer, it will need to be accepted by the other party prior to the offer being withdrawn, or expiring.
There were so much things missing regarding the 'trade' that it wouldn't even be called 'similar to a contract' in my country.. You can learn about contracts here. |
|
|
|
Yup, looks like the yobit signature ban is over. Interestingly though, jerald25 and Quickseller are the only two people i've seen posting with a yobit signature yet. Are they actually getting paid?
No clue, I saw who I presume to be jerald25 with a yobit signature, and decided to investigate if their campaign is still open, and it turns out it is. Hopefully this time around, they will do a better job of policing their campaign. |
|
|
|
[..] 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.. The value decreased when you disclosed the confidential information. 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..
Sting operations are always double edged sword. Sting operations are a) done by law enforcement with strict oversight, and b) do not allow law enforcement to steal (or attempt to steal) from others, nor do they allow law enforcement to commit other torts If you want to look at what you are buying before being obligated to buy said item, you should not make an offer before seeing it.
An offer is not an obligation. In my state even when buying a house an offer is just an offer and can be withdrawn for any reason before you sign an actual contract. Let alone buying a bicycle on Craigslist and making an offer over the phone. The offer does not expose a person to liability. In order for an offer to obligate the person making the offer, it will need to be accepted by the other party prior to the offer being withdrawn, or expiring. |
|
|
|
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.
These are the only ones that are proven to be up for sale, but only to the extent the PMs can be proven. 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. It wouldn't. Alice/bob didn't agree to pay for merely disclosing the account names, and that's all that happened. He offered to pay for an account, which he didn't end up getting. According to your "logic" any kind of price/deal negotiation would be a flaggable breach of contract, which is of course utter nonsense. If I say "I'll pay $50 for your bicycle" and change my mind upon seeing said bicycle I'm not breaching your imaginary contract. You are wrong, as per usual. There is no requirement to see what is being sold in order for a contract to be valid. The OP made an offer that was accepted by the other party once he fulfilled his part of the contract. If you want to look at what you are buying before being obligated to buy said item, you should not make an offer before seeing it. |
|
|
|
A possible alt of yogg or a possible friend of yogg or someone BRAND NEW ACCOUNT acting in a very suspicious manner now advertising YOGG the trust abusing scammer supporter of bitcointalks latest scheme?? OH REALLY??
There are a small subset of users who very infrequently post. I met one person a few years ago who had zero posts, positive trust and several days of online time -- it doesn't appear he was interested in posting here, and created an account in order to trade here. I personally think it would have been more appropriate to post in the OP's sales thread that he completed a trade with the help of yogg, rather than create a new thread. I have no idea if the OP is an alt of yogg or not, but I don't really see him getting any additional reputation from this thread, so I would believe the chances are unlikely this to be true. |
|
|
|
These are the only ones that are proven to be up for sale, but only to the extent the PMs can be proven. 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. |
|
|
|
That tweet reminds me of the price of bitcoin in 2017, and hopefully in 2019  |
|
|
|
Based on LFC_Bitcoin’s response here, his trust rating, among other things, I have excluded him from my trust list. I would encourage others to do the same. You can exclude him from your trust list by adding the following to your trust list: |
|
|
|
Please resubmit 30 days from your previous submission. (July 9, 2019). |
|
|
|
It is Jr. Member with 1 negative trust from DTs, I think it is not better action if I will post the member who PMed me, I can just use the report button 'Report to admin' in the messages.
This could already prove that the user is somewhat shaddy and should be banned for this threat. The person having negative trust from "DTs" is proof of absolutely nothing, and I can almost guarantee you will not factor into any decision to possibly ban the person. |
|
|
|
Can you provide any context? Do you have some kind of dispute with the person?
You can report the post tp the moderators to be reviewed. You should also contact the police if you believe your live is in immediate danger.
That's all, he just PMed me today with that, this is the first time I saw his profile. It is okay if I can post the user's profile here?Sure, but you will need to report the PM to the moderators if you want any real chance for anything to be done about it. If there is no additional context, that is the entire message, and you are unaware of any reason for him to want harm to you, I don't think this breaks the rules. Again, if you feel you are in danger, you should contact the police. Banning the person is not going to remove any danger, if it exists. |
|
|
|
The first thing that I thought about the way it was presented in the headlines here is if it's true or if it was a false flag. Because really, what does Iran gain by shooting down a US drone?
The Iran government had admitted to shooting down the drone... |
|
|
|
|
Can you provide any context? Do you have some kind of dispute with the person?
You can report the post tp the moderators to be reviewed. You should also contact the police if you believe your live is in immediate danger.
|
|
|
|
If Hhampuz wants to go on the record
So we're back to "he hasn't denied it so it must be true" bullshit  No. it is not reasonable to assume what is being suggested is actually true. Further there is blockchain evidence of the theft. |
|
|
|
I have no idea what you are saying. It is not a complicated concept that a person needs to pay for living expenses on an ongoing basis. It is also not a complicated concept to expect a person to not be able to use all of their income to go towards a loan. Is it possible that Hhampuz is in a position where they are not the ones paying for all/most of their living expenses? If you are looking for an excuse for saying Hhampuz is innocent, then sure, his landlady actually pays him for living where he lives. Realistically, looking at the blockchain around his known addresses and other public information, I can confidently say this is not the case. If Hhampuz wants to go on the record to say that he has no/few living expenses, or some other excuse others have offered for him, he is free to do so. If he does make this kind of assertion, unless there is evidence to the contrary, it would be unreasonable to not accept it as fact, however without the assertion coming from him, the mere possibility falls outside of the scope of reasonable doubt. If he were to make an assertion in his defense that is shown to be untrue, he would be shown to have lied, and it would be additional evidence he is trying to cover up what actually happened. Also The loan is only evidence of a motive. There is blockchain evidence to support the underlying accusation that remains true regardless of motive. |
|
|
|
Trump just tweeted that Iran made a big mistake. I would presume the US military is going to respond. The US cannot let its enemy do what can only be described as an act of war and us not respond. If we do nothing, these types of attacks will continue and will possibly escalate. You do understand that your "ennemy" simply dared shooting a drone that you flew over their country right? How can you prevent such "attacks" from continuing I wonder... MAYBE BY NOT FLYING A FUCKING DRONE OVER THEIR COUNTRY?? The US position is that it was flying in international airspace. I trust the US government more than the largest state sponsor of terrorism (Iran government). Trump just tweeted that Iran made a big mistake. I would presume the US military is going to respond. The US cannot let its enemy do what can only be described as an act of war and us not respond. If we do nothing, these types of attacks will continue and will possibly escalate. Respond with missles and air strikes. No boots on the ground This would be most idea, so that few American lives are at risk. However even air strikes risk retaliation by Iran against military bases we have in the region. I believe we have military bases in both the UAE and Saudi Arabia, plus we have military assets in the ocean nearby. |
|
|
|
Hhampuz has other bills. The money could have been used to pay for his various living expenses so that his forum earnings could be used to solely repay the loan.
I don't really understand where are people actually coming in your defense when you look clearly confused and jumbled in your own thoughts trying to shuffle things and repeat back the same music you've had been constantly singing since you tried to inflame things here. Why are you blaming Hhampuz when you're not clear whether you know his actual earnings are more than what the repayment amount was? As well, one more question here: Do you personally know Hhampuz? As that's the only way someone can be very thoughtful and known to things like ^bills and living expenses^ as you've described here so clearly in your words. It's actually weird because everyone here has a life, so there's nothing new that we heard. I have no idea what you are saying. It is not a complicated concept that a person needs to pay for living expenses on an ongoing basis. It is also not a complicated concept to expect a person to not be able to use all of their income to go towards a loan. The loan is only evidence of a motive. There is blockchain evidence to support the underlying accusation that remains true regardless of motive. |
|
|
|
Trump just tweeted that Iran made a big mistake. I would presume the US military is going to respond. The US cannot let its enemy do what can only be described as an act of war and us not respond. If we do nothing, these types of attacks will continue and will possibly escalate. |
|
|
|
I would like the ability to click on a link on a post that starts a PM to the author of the post that says: Hi [username],
Regarding [link to post] One click links on a post to view a person's post history and thread creation history would also be nice. As would a one click link to a user's gettopics link from a post. I strongly prefer something that can be run from greesemonkey. Thanks. That wouldn't be too difficult, I can repurpose https://github.com/Initscri/BPIP-Chrome-Extension/blob/master/content-script.js for this Icons or just text links? Text links are preferable. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Update on the tax allegations? Shouldn't I be in jail by now?
Be careful, Vod might open up a frivolous Flag against you saying he thinks you are a high risk because you don’t pay your taxes, even though he has no evidence of this. I guess the promised tax situation update was just another lie. That would appear to be the case. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
