Theymos didn't invent trust system for you and "your newbie accounts" to farm it.
Put your proof out there. proof of trust farming: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5190446.0I can swear to anything in this universe that I don't know DadyD, I don't control the account, I didn't make the account, I've never seen that name, etc, etc. So if your accusation is based on a hunch, you got the problem not me..
You said I was dropped as a child and I say DadyD is your alt account. So, either we are both wrong or one of us is right or we are both right 
(note: I didn't say DadyD is your alt account, you probably confused words "your newbie accounts" with "your alt account") |
|
|
|
Who copies and pastes someone else's negative feedback after they change it to a neutral.
Someone who was dropped as a child. |
|
|
|
|
Theymos didn't invent trust system for you and "your newbie accounts" to farm it.
|
|
|
|
especially with newbies who are usually lost around here
Oh, only if " they" are newbies  He would have not placed anything had Direwolf left the original negative.. That's also a part of my point..
I was dropped as a child so you have to forgive me for being "slow". Actually, I wouldn't have placed anything if that feedback has been left as it was because it perfectly suits your profile - "helping " newbie" " to farm trust. Don't you worry about me, you will see my moral side when I get that loan back, but just wait for it. Yes he said he wanted to establish TRUST. And you don't see any issue with someone taking a loan for the sole purpose of building trust. . How can no one see this? There was no resolve time here - it was straight to negative trust placement. I don't know in what twisted reality do you live but after I asked first time "do we have a deal" you said: Anyway, marlboroza, I can send it to you no problem at DadyD's command.
And after that you didn't back out, "you have been told" to send funds back: @ marcotheminer please return my funds, its a dead end here.
But just keep that threads and negative coming, I am sure you will find supporters. |
|
|
|
So what was the point of pushing this "loan"? Your negative trust its the point, almost for what you need to know. Thanks for the loan, tomorrow i should be abble to repay it or within 9/10.
Whatever you say, keep me informed. I forget to ask you to which address do you want your collateral back? |
|
|
|
We all know what happened here so I won't pretend and I will copy/paste your neutral and turn it into negative. As far as I am concerned, I don't trust marcotheminer, I don't trust any newbie account who makes deal with him and I don't trust any newbie account who uses him as an escrow. Person holding someone's 0.002 BTC and at the same time not providing them 0.0015 BTC with repayment of 0.0018 BTC after they previously provided them 0.0015 BTC no-collateral loan speaks for itself. Neither am I helping them get a loan
That is not true either, with all things said in this thread, you indeed tried to help "them" to get loan https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5030169.msg52659481#msg52659481 |
|
|
|
Nothing here. Because people ask for a loan in a crypto they are not holding, and provide a different crypto (that they would prefer not to sell, but could be sold to recover the lender's costs if they default) as collateral. It makes absolutely zero sense to ask for a loan of bitcoin whilst sending bitcoin as collateral. There is not a bank in the world which will give you a $1000 loan on the condition that you first give them $1100 to hold.
I can only think of cash secured loans where you receive interest from collateral (well, not technically from collateral) and pay interest to bank for credit and sometimes both parties can make profit. It is still cash collateral for cash loan. |
|
|
|
Please avoid to reply anymore if not interested in loan.
OP updated, if someone still interested.
Loan Amount: 0.0015BTC
Loan Purpose: Invet
Loan Repay Amount: 0.002BTC
Loan Repay Date: Within 48h
Type of Collateral: my escrow will pay you if i dont repay my loan. i'll sent first 0.0017 as collateral if needed.
Escrow profile Link: marcotheminer removed.
Bitcoin Address: 3GmZmYbZKLJ8TyR5mvFEUXwxvbffb1BEpD
I am interested. Send 0.0017 BTC collateral to this address bc1qgt59jdkfz2uvt00nddrfheuzu4mcts5dhyer3m and confirm this 3GmZmYbZKLJ8TyR5mvFEUXwxvbffb1BEpD is address where I will send 0.0015 BTC. Repayment address: bc1qgt59jdkfz2uvt00nddrfheuzu4mcts5dhyer3m |
|
|
|
The only wrong thing it's your attitude and your sarcasm in your first post. Ppl do it with service of loan and escrow but dont mention it...
There is nothing wrong with my attitude towards trust farming. |
|
|
|
And if i use an altcoin as other say and use to do?
I ask for 0.0015 BTC and as collateral i bring 0.085 eth and i promise to pay you back 0.0018 BTC, no, wait...i dont have to repay you cuse the collateral cover all mmmh...Sounds familiar? I just chose to repay 0.0003 btc as interest in 48h...Its just a coincidence.
Actually, you are right, it is just that you want to buy trust this way, it is simple wrong. I ask for 0.02 BTC and i'll repay you 0.022 BTC ( a normal loan+10% int ) and as collateral i bring 1,4 eth...The amout asked+10% interest...mh...
Tell me your theory i'm curious.
What about this, send me collateral 0.022 BTC and I will send you 0.02 BTC, and you don't have to repay me loan 0.02 BTC + 10% interest but I will keep 0.022 BTC collateral? |
|
|
|
0.0017 BTC collateral for 0.0015 BTC? Lol, and I thought I have seen it all. I'll buy this, as I don't trust your escrow, send me 0.0017 BTC collateral, I will send you 0.0015 BTC loan and as you will have to repay me 0.0018 BTC, no, wait....let's make that collateral 0.0018 BTC and you don't have to repay me and I will keep collateral. Or maybe to just send me 0.0003 BTC?  Do we have a deal? Also, I have a strong suspicion this "newbie" isn't really a newbie at all.
I have theory about this... |
|
|
|
1) you can only win short term - i make up to 5-10% of balance profit, then cashout and make new IP then new account!
[...]
all i said - it's free and without bullshit, i have studied dicebot since 2017
What's keeping you from doing this then? If your strategy worked you would have been millionaire by now, but it doesn't work and you are just trying to get few referrals who will believe in all this nonsense you posted and they will lose money while you will get commission. explanation for dummies:
"provably fair" refers to the fact that house has an edge and it is provable that you gonna lose in the long run, because math says so!
No, it really does not refer to that. Read. |
|
|
|
Anyway first answer yes or no and stop being scared of us. YES OR NO?? it is totally acceptable for them to edit it or not.
You are setting a precedent for scammers to be able to edit the evidence of their scam posts. They can leave out details and change the entire perception of the ORIGINAL INCIDENT and many details the honest member should be entitled to read.
Why would I answer question after you said that I said something? |
|
|
|
Yep another great excuse here everyone You will never guess why I merited that post the rest of your post is confusing as usual.
If you could point me to part which you find confusing, I will try to explain it better, but please don't spam random nonsense. then tries to sell his account for 0.3btc
At least post correct information, which you can find in archived link which you asked for. I suppose that you have read it. Thanks for reporting it you good little croatian dog. Keep yapping, and reporting like a pathetic servile snitch
Reporting your post emotionally satisfied me. YOU say it is fine for scammers/scam facilitators to edit the evidence of thier scams after they have been busted and that is not shady behavior at all. I mean they leave them there for years on end BUT then when someone really starts to bring it to light years later they can edit them if they want, and that is totally acceptable and does not look shady. Is that what you are saying moronbozo? Yes or NO.
I am happy for you to say YES so please don't hold back.
You did it again. You said that I said something then you asked me am I saying it.
So lets see about this " EDITING HIS POST HISTORY TO HIDE HIS ACCOUNT SELLING PAST??". What do we know from edited nutildah's thread? They wanted to sell account and then they said they decided to keep account. What did we know from not edited nutildah's thread? They wanted to sell account and then they said they decided to keep account. Where is "hiding past" part? |
|
|
|
so moronbozo says
It is acceptable for DT1 members to edit the proof that confirms they are guilty of financially motivated wrong doing and it does NOT look shady. It is only strange that a person may mention this move to edit the original form of evidence after many years.
Is that what you are saying moronbozo?
You spammed random words, then you said I said them and then you asked me am I saying this. They referenced it?? so now when you click the link you get a different heading and different text to what they referenced hey?? that is useful.
I am pretty sure they linked archived thread, I would have posted it but you said that "you won't click my offsite links because I am untrustworthy" so why would I waste my time posting something you won't click? Moronbozo for you everyone.
Looks like your post. Are you me? WOW that was deleted fast by the scum bag mods and some fucking piece of shit reporter
I reported it, multiposting is not allowed. EDIT: 2. one person has archived it (lucky right)
How many persons have to archive it to become archived enough for you? |
|
|
|
|
You said it so many times that probably every "guest" who has never registered account here knows this, not to mention that it was archived few times and someone linked it on nutildahz trust page. What is the point of creating another thread for something you mentioned at least 500000 times in your posts?
|
|
|
|
|
Can you do "IsHackedBannedScumAccountStillPartOfTecsharesTrustNetwork"?
|
|
|
|
You haven't show any damages, if you got all your coins back you have nothing to complain about.
You still haven't shown the ability to read. What you have described here is something which might be true, however, I am not going to support flag because some random exchange which you trusted with money all of sudden start asking KYC because maybe their authorities told them to do so because something is maybe changed in law. So what is important to support this flag - have you sent them your real ID's and they didn't allow you to withdraw you, have you sent them fake ID's and they didn't allow you to withdraw, maybe you withdraw, maybe you didn't, maybe you didn't have funds there, maybe you did everything and this is exit scam. I can't really say from your post and thread. I have also heard that there is other way to withdraw money without doing KYC (someone posted in their thread IIRC)so if another option do exist where is damage? Have you tried to do it? You don't like it feel free to oppose the flag.
Contract flags shouldn't be supported or opposed based on personal feelings. This isn't just about me, there are plenty of others who may not use Bitcointalk.org, who will be "damaged" much worse than myself.
I hope you are wrong, but I have also read that someone went trough KYC and withdraw funds, who should we believe now? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
