Clearing up major disagreements in rep.

[marcotheminer]

As you may be able to tell by my trust score of the closer half of my account’s existence; negative feedback left has been rather aggressive, but importantly to me- largely speculated and even then, on falsehoods.

Both ‘sides’, we can argue to non-conclusions on the fact that there exists evidence to justify according to some of  this “linking” me to problems, yes. That being said, I am able to clear my name with the reported allegations. I do not exist as a scammer nor continue to be active on this forum as a scammer; I do not owe none money and I am owed by only a few other members on here, presumed defaulted/scammed or pending. Problems may stem from my poor actions in the first half of my account’s existence (some things defendable some I cannot deny my foolishness). Since this transition, I have had issues with repayment on loans, which led to more negatives from external “observing” parties - but always settled them.

I have one account that I use here and can still verify my originally staked address. From here my claims can be narrowed down onto specifics and certain events. Now is the issue… All of this “clearing up my own name” will likely not reverse the tarnishes of certain “trusted members” (there should be a test to pass on this forum to be able to leave impacting trust feedback), I have reached out to most if not all at some point to try reason  about and dive deeper with them and have them understand whichever situation first beckoned the negative tag. To no avail because we are both “minds made up”; only that I know I am not well represented by their feedbacks. This is not to say I do not owe a serious apology to many on here. For such; I feel the punishment has been dished out but inappropriately.

Has the forum changed to the point where there isn’t that community standing in at least feedbacks? Or do I somehow rise to the occasion and continue proving that even in 10 years I will hop on from time to time and not have scammed anyone yet still.

BTC is the basis for this forum’s existence. Trust but verify as a verdict let’s me ask one last question: BTC believers, have we lost the original feeling of this place and the essence of p2p currency, or naturally we succumbed to the masses’ wild visions and never put a foot down?

Thank you if read and if responded even nicer of you Nice continuation to all, hopefully the community continues to be strong on the technicals boards as they always were!

[Plaguedeath]

BTC is the basis for this forum’s existence. Trust but verify as a verdict let’s me ask one last question: BTC believers, have we lost the original feeling of this place and the essence of p2p currency, or naturally we succumbed to the masses’ wild visions and never put a foot down?

What do you mean? people make judgement with proof, blockchain never lie.

Actually, it was my fault that I had not checked at the time of lending the money to them. All of the mentioned users use part of the same account, the Bitcoin wallet. You can check it at https://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/013184bb1458a768/addresses

The logic is like this, there are 7 people are using the same wallet, each of them can access the coins in this wallet if they have the seed phrase. Why do people have to use the same wallet?

I have one account that I use here and can still verify my originally staked address. From here my claims can be narrowed down onto specifics and certain events.Now is the issue… All of this “clearing up my own name” will likely not reverse the tarnishes of certain “trusted members” (there should be a test to pass on this forum to be able to leave impacting trust feedback)

Because you've understand and know Bitcoin in depth.

Signing a message only serves to confirm the ownership of this account. And even then, it cannot be 100%.

[nutildah]

Here's the thing: you have 10+ years of negative feedback left by Default Trust. The earliest feedback references trading stolen accounts. This is the problem with account selling: as the previous owner, you are responsible for all damages the account causes after it leaves your hands. Same thing works in reverse: the new owner is responsible for all damages caused by the old owner. That is called accountability, and that doesn't just go out the window because you think it should.

So your accounts went on to do bad things after you sold them. You should still be red tagged.

[Wiwo]

Here's the thing: you have 10+ years of negative feedback left by Default Trust. The earliest feedback references trading stolen accounts. This is the problem with account selling: as the previous owner, you are responsible for all damages the account causes after it leaves your hands. Same thing works in reverse: the new owner is responsible for all damages caused by the old owner. That is called accountability, and that doesn't just go out the window because you think it should.

So your accounts went on to do bad things after you sold them. You should still be red tagged.

The ops still write as if the account is still in the control of the buyer, since from the look of this, some of the statements and terms is unstructured and lack correlation, like he mentioned p2p and all of that, in the last paragraph in his statement,  this inconsistency clearly shows that this account may, is still handled by a newbies and not the original owner who is supposed to be a legendary with good knowledge.

[Free Market Capitalist]

As you may be able to tell by my trust score of the closer half of my account’s existence; negative feedback left has been rather aggressive, but importantly to me- largely speculated and even then, on falsehoods.

You don't even believe that yourself. Just because feedback is aggressive doesn't mean it's incorrect, and there are many cases on the forum where negative feedback is changed to neutral or even deleted. So you're not going to convince anyone that all the negative feedback you've had for so long is unfair and that you're a victim.

[JollyGood]

You probably knew very well that you would not have any of your negative feedback rescinded regardless of what you wrote when creating this thread, yet you proceeded. The question has to asked, if you knew it would be a futile exercise why would you waste time embarking on it?

I am not too familiar of the situation surrounding your account and the negative tags but I have come across it several times over years therefore have some small understanding. On the surface, it seems as though you created this thread as reference point to (refer to) as and when you return to the forum in future as some form of explanation/statement regarding your proclaimed innocence and unfair treatment at the hands of allegedly overzealous DT members.

I think it is fairly clear you will not get any of those negative tags removed and the only reason the marcotheminer account has any value to you is because of the potential to monetise it had those negative tags not been there. You are probably holding on to hope that some of those tags will be removed in future.

As you may be able to tell by my trust score of the closer half of my account’s existence; negative feedback left has been rather aggressive, but importantly to me- largely speculated and even then, on falsehoods.

~snip~

Thank you if read and if responded even nicer of you Nice continuation to all, hopefully the community continues to be strong on the technicals boards as they always were!

[JeromeTash]

I think those late loan payments you used to make are what brought all the issues. I would imagine even after 10 years, that feedback remaining there is a reminder to the future lenders of what you did in the past and could likely do the same in the future. I mean you still try to acquire loans so such feedback is important to the lender before they decide to send you the money.
Is such negative feedback really speculated or made on falsehoods?

[LoyceV]

Problems may stem from my poor actions in the first half of my account’s existence (some things defendable some I cannot deny my foolishness). Since this transition, I have had issues with repayment on loans

Have you considered to stop asking for new loans? That's the main cause of your reputation problems.

[marcotheminer]

Problems may stem from my poor actions in the first half of my account’s existence (some things defendable some I cannot deny my foolishness). Since this transition, I have had issues with repayment on loans

Have you considered to stop asking for new loans? That's the main cause of your reputation problems.

I am in agreement here. Even though I am asking within my means of repayment; I will refrain from asking if the current one is not filled. Again though, having asked for this one I do not think warranted the additional neg’s..

[suchmoon]

Has the forum changed to the point where there isn’t that community standing in at least feedbacks? Or do I somehow rise to the occasion and continue proving that even in 10 years I will hop on from time to time and not have scammed anyone yet still.

BTC is the basis for this forum’s existence. Trust but verify as a verdict let’s me ask one last question: BTC believers, have we lost the original feeling of this place and the essence of p2p currency, or naturally we succumbed to the masses’ wild visions and never put a foot down?

LOL what's with this bullshit appeal to BTC "essence". Bitcoin is supposed to be trustless by design, if we can't verify a transaction on the blockchain then it doesn't exist, but all you're saying is just "trust me bro".

As for allegations against you, such as accounts linked to you being scammers, you haven't even attempted to come clean with those. Did you sell them, who's the buyer etc, that's what is needed here, not some vague wall of text. Even then, there is no reason anyone should take your word for it, so it's kinda pointless and a waste of time. Go away, get a job, DCA some bitcoins, and seek professional help if you have a scam addiction.

[JollyGood]

It is impossible to know what his intentions were, maybe creating this thread was a smokescreen he intended to use to proclaim innocence for any future nefarious conduct. As far as any future loan requests are concerned, it is now a certainty he will not be successful. Only a lender that is missing the clear signs and red tags on his account would even bother taking his loan requests in to consideration. The feedback will remain on his account for obvious reasons.

I think those late loan payments you used to make are what brought all the issues. I would imagine even after 10 years, that feedback remaining there is a reminder to the future lenders of what you did in the past and could likely do the same in the future. I mean you still try to acquire loans so such feedback is important to the lender before they decide to send you the money.
Is such negative feedback really speculated or made on falsehoods?

[marcotheminer]

Jesus, a lot of spiralling on this forum. I do agree, the community is to  be the judge regarding loan requests. Alas both sides will have their voice to express. I shall try once again to turn the page, as I am in no wrongdoing.

[nutildah]

I am in no wrongdoing.

You keep saying that but nobody believes you. Especially because you haven't even attempted to provide an explanation of what actually happened, according to you. Its like you're talking to yourself, just trying to convince yourself that you did nothing wrong. You can avoid taking responsibility for your actions but continuing this approach won't help restore the community's confidence in your account.