Quickseller/ACCTSeller abusing trust system (here we go again!)

[tspacepilot]

So, hello again folks.  Anyone who looks through my recent post history will see that over the last few weeks I've disagreed with quickseller both over content and over how he addresses me (and others).  He not only got removed from my personal trust list but he also made my ignore list for a while.  Well, whaddya know, about 24 hours after he leaves the signature ad campaign I'm in, his alt, ACCTSeller appears and begins to troll me.  ACCTSeller trolls me for about 24 hours (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357263;sa=showPosts).  He starts by saying that the stuff I say sucks, I ask why he's trolling me and he goes on.

He finds, guess what, some negative feedback from the (in)famous tradefortress from about 2.5 years ago.  He posts in the ask tf thread trying to get help to dig up dirt on me.  I say to him in that thread, if you want to know more, there's a thread in meta from about 2.5 years ago.   Well, he finds it and here's where I think he's made a crucial mistake.  He switches back over to his account on default trust and repeats tradefortresses negative feedback about me.  So, of course, my campaign manager says to me "hey you have negative trust now, what happened".  I say, well, this dude is trolling me, regurgitating the lies of a known scammer in order to get me kicked off this campaign for some kind of personal vendetta.  Of course campaign manager says, well, I have no choice, default trust is default trust.

So, here I am (and I sorta figured this was coming because I've been challenging the tyranny of default trust in other threads https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.0, I kinda knew that someone on default trust would eventually take it out on me; interestingly, I predicted that ACCTSeller would use his alt quickseller to neg-rep me for nothing, if he was ballsy enough https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1031791.msg11140144#msg11140144), asking you guys why Quickseller's rehashing of 3 year old lies from tradefortress has any bearing on my ability to use this forum today.  I guess one thing I can do is get some of the folks I have worked with over the past few years to speak up about how I've never done anything untrustworthy and was even very helpful.  But in the end, I don't think I'll have much recourse.  Probably history will vindicate me, as it did with tradefortress (his lies were never removed, but eventually he was removed; I supposed the same will happened eventually with Quickseller).

Maybe I can leave you all with this question: is Quickseller's usage of default trust for some kind of personal vendetta considered enough of an abuse to have him removed from default-trust?  How bout the fact that as of now he's essentially echoing the lies of someone who was removed from default trust for good reason?  Certainly someone who is uncritically echoing tradefortresses removed opinions shouldn't be on default trust anymore than tradefortress.

[Lauda]

Not this again! I, and probably a lot of people are getting tired of these fights.
@quickseller How old are you? 5?
How about you drop the drama here. Now I ain't gonna take a side, because I wouldn't be surprised if I got negative trust as well. What you should have done is ignore his alt too, and just report the necro posts. There needs to be a line between disagreeing and distrusting someone. This makes me wonder if the staff (or whoever adds people) has correctly appointed members to the default trust list. There are a lot more mature and reliable members of the newer generation than someone who intentionally abuses trust due to a disagreement(s).
Don't you think so?

Trust isn't really moderated often. This is where it is a problem. People suffer the consequences.

[TerminatorXL]

How is this guy still on the trust list?

[snip]
Do you have any evidence that Quicksilver and ACCTseller are the same person?

Before I answer this. Do you publicly deny that ACCTseller is not your alternate account? If you don't deny this, why did you need to ask this question?

See my above comment. If you cannot prove a claim then you should not make such claim. I do not need to deny anything, it is on you to prove what you say is true.
[snip]

INB4 prove it: Plenty of circumstantial evidence.

https://i.imgur.com/8KK6PeC.gif

INB4 why new account: Because accounts that bring up sale of bitcointalk accounts are instantly banned.
If you quote this post, your post will be deleted too.

And yeah, people are laughing at us.

http://s8.postimg.org/d4hal92o5/Capture.png

[tspacepilot]

Not this again! I, and probably a lot of people are getting tired of these fights.
@quickseller How old are you? 5?
How about you drop the drama here. Now I ain't gonna take a side, because I wouldn't be surprised if I got negative trust as well. What you should have done is ignore his alt too, and just report the necro posts. There needs to be a line between disagreeing and distrusting someone. This makes me wonder if the staff (or whoever adds people) has correctly appointed members to the default trust list. There are a lot more mature and reliable members of the newer generation than someone who intentionally abuses trust due to a disagreement(s).
Don't you think so?

Trust isn't really moderated often. This is where it is a problem. People suffer the consequences.

Thanks for the support.  I'd like to think that this kinda of immaturity would get him removed from default-trust but I sorta doubt it.

[dogie]

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

[redsn0w]

Not this again! I, and probably a lot of people are getting tired of these fights.
@quickseller How old are you? 5?
How about you drop the drama here. Now I ain't gonna take a side, because I wouldn't be surprised if I got negative trust as well. What you should have done is ignore his alt too, and just report the necro posts. There needs to be a line between disagreeing and distrusting someone. This makes me wonder if the staff (or whoever adds people) has correctly appointed members to the default trust list. There are a lot more mature and reliable members of the newer generation than someone who intentionally abuses trust due to a disagreement(s).
Don't you think so?

Trust isn't really moderated often. This is where it is a problem. People suffer the consequences.

Thanks for the support.  I'd like to think that this kinda of immaturity would get him removed from default-trust but I sorta doubt it.

I cannot say much about this fact, but I really doubt he will be removed from the defaultTrust list. Good luck with your fight, it will be really a difficult battle.

However  what is the purpose to leave a negative trust for a 'probable fact' of ~ 2 years ago? Maybe try to send him a PM and he will (maybe) remove it... who knows?

[Blazed]

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

Where do we find that PPDO stat at? I am curious what category I fit into! I did the math manualy and I average 6.3 posts per day...not a spammer/shill then \o/

[tspacepilot]

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

Thanks for the info about the index.  I think that the order of affairs here speaks volumes:
  1) the fact that I've had no interaction with ACCTSeller for many months (at least) and then the fact that as soon as Quickseller quits my campaign ACCTSeller appears in my thread and trolls me in every imaginable way
  2) no interaction with Quickseller during this trolling
  3) as soon as ACCTSeller necrobumps the old accusation from Tradefortress, the negrep from Quickseller appears within a few hours (with no interaction with me).

It's hard to interpret this in any other way.  What else does Quickseller gain from this except fulfillment of the personal vendetta which he seems to have taken against me (look through his history, you'll see him calling me an idiot, saying that I'm a spammer, etc).

The other thing I can say about this PPDO index is that in the case of ACCTSeller, the account seems to have been used for very little until recently when it was used for about 24 hours to troll me (it has now gone inactive again).  I don't know if this explains the PPDO numbers you point out (I'm a little slow and I haven't yet understood what those numbers mean).

Not this again! I, and probably a lot of people are getting tired of these fights.
@quickseller How old are you? 5?
How about you drop the drama here. Now I ain't gonna take a side, because I wouldn't be surprised if I got negative trust as well. What you should have done is ignore his alt too, and just report the necro posts. There needs to be a line between disagreeing and distrusting someone. This makes me wonder if the staff (or whoever adds people) has correctly appointed members to the default trust list. There are a lot more mature and reliable members of the newer generation than someone who intentionally abuses trust due to a disagreement(s).
Don't you think so?

Trust isn't really moderated often. This is where it is a problem. People suffer the consequences.

Thanks for the support.  I'd like to think that this kinda of immaturity would get him removed from default-trust but I sorta doubt it.

I cannot say much about this fact, but I really doubt he will be removed from the defaultTrust list. Good luck with your fight, it will be really a difficult battle.

However   what is the purpose to leave a negative trust for a 'probable fact' of ~ 2 years ago? Maybe try to send him a PM and he will (maybe) remove it... who knows?

Thanks for the support.  As you say, it's unlikely that anything will be done.  I can't imagine that Quickseller/ACCTSeller is going to respond to a PM request to remove the trust as it was clearly his goal to try to uncover something in my past that he could pass off as legitimate reason to get me kicked out of the signature ad campaign.  It's a shame that the trolls seem to have won this.  But I guess that time will tell (I've been around longer than Quickseller, I assume I will be around long after him).

[erikalui]

Who is in the default trust list and whose negative feedback has been considered as valid? Quickseller or ACCTSeller or both? I don't see these 2 on my default trust list and mainly I have the list which was "Default" when I joined this forum. My list is:

theymos (1)
HostFat (1)
dooglus (2)
Maged (1)
dserrano5 (1)
OgNasty (1)
Tomatocage (1)
SaltySpitoon (1)
DeaDTerra (1)
BadBear (1)
philipma1957 (1)
escrow.ms (1)
OldScammerTag (2)
Vod (-1)
DefaultTrust (4)
Smack That Ace (1)

Is this only list counted or even those members are counted who have been specifically added by other users? Then probably the list would be much longer and never ending and in this case, mostly many members' trust would be considered valid.

[tspacepilot]

Who is in the default trust list and whose negative feedback has been considered as valid? Quickseller or ACCTSeller or both? I don't see these 2 on my default trust list and mainly I have the list which was "Default" when I joined this forum. My list is:

theymos (1)
HostFat (1)
dooglus (2)
Maged (1)
dserrano5 (1)
OgNasty (1)
Tomatocage (1)
SaltySpitoon (1)
DeaDTerra (1)
BadBear (1)
philipma1957 (1)
escrow.ms (1)
OldScammerTag (2)
Vod (-1)
DefaultTrust (4)
Smack That Ace (1)

Is this only list counted or even those members are counted who have been specifically added by other users? Then probably the list would be much longer and never ending and in this case, mostly many members' trust would be considered valid.

Quickseller is (or was, if it's was, then that's a very recent change) on default trust.  ACCTSeller was the account that was actively trolling me, Quickseller account is the one used to get me kicked from the signature advert campaign I'm in.  Presumably because of the disagreements with Quickseller a few weeks ago (he called me an idiot, I called him a hothead).

[ACCTseller]

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact.

I gave you a negative trust because I wanted to warn people that you are wanting to make it easier to scam others, even after they have been outed as scammers. This in itself is scammy behavior, but maybe doesn't make it necessary for you to have a "trade with extreme caution tag".

Regardless I do think you are a spammer/scammer and should be warned, especially when you are openly admit to behavior that violated the terms of of CoinChat, made an account that was intentionally confusing to make yourself look innocent and then withdrew funds that you never should have received in the first place.

[tspacepilot]

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact.

I gave you a negative trust because I wanted to warn people that you are wanting to make it easier to scam others, even after they have been outed as scammers. This in itself is scammy behavior, but maybe doesn't make it necessary for you to have a "trade with extreme caution tag".

Regardless I do think you are a spammer/scammer and should be warned, especially when you are openly admit to behavior that violated the terms of of CoinChat, made an account that was intentionally confusing to make yourself look innocent and then withdrew funds that you never should have received in the first place.

Hello ACCTseller, thanks for joining the discussion.  It's really sorta weird that you found it worth your while to troll through 3 years of posts in order to rehash lies of tradefortress.  It's certainly not something I'd be very worried about, except that your more powerful alt swooped in to finish the job and get me kicked out of the campaign I was in (again, based on 2.5 year old unsubstantied lies from a known scammer).

What's more, I don't do any trading on here (never have, probably never will).  I mainly use the forum to explore technical questions related to the bitcoin protocol, wallet software, importing/exporting keys, etc.  I occasionally take jobs writing code and fixing up people's websites but again, your trolling perogative wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if it weren't for your more-powerful alter-ego.  I like to take a little extra btc from signature ad campaigns and as you stated in my campaign thread, you wanted to see me kicked out (pretty sure this is because I offended you when I called out quickseller for being a hothead).

Anywhoo, thanks for helping me to exemplify the issues with the power of people on default trust to take out personal vendettas against people they haven't even traded with.  I'm doubtful that anything will be done about it, but I guess I can answer the guy on my other thread in meta with a more personal example now.

Once you're ready to log in as your more powerful alt then we can talk more about how you seem to think that tradefortress' year-old lies are relevant or substantiated or whatever you may argue.  Looking forward to it!

[TerminatorXL]

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

Not sure what you're suggesting, that he doesn't distribute his time uniformly across all of his accounts? Why would he?
Both accounts sell/sold bitcointalk accounts. To buy one, one needs to be a bitcointalk member already, so the notion of alt accounts is certainly not foreign to him. Why let the merchandise rot on the shelf? Would you really expect him not to post from those accounts, making them more valuable in the process?

The subs frequented and posting activity by time pretty much overlap. And of course, he doesn't deny the account is his alt.

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact. ...

Do you deny it?

[Quickseller]

Alright tspacepilot scammer, I am not sure why you opened this thread, especially without even a single PM (who is the hothead now?) asking about the trust.

I will reconsider the trust that I left you. I do however have a few questions that you need to explicitly and clearly answer in order for me to make an evaluation:
1 - Did you use a bot on CoinChat used to automatically make posts?
2 - Did you use the above bot with a username with "b0t" as part of it's handle?
3 - Did you receive anything in writing from anyone, ever, that informed you that you were banned from CoinChat?
4 - Did you receive anything in writing from anyone, ever, that informed you that any bot must have the term "bot" in it's handle?
5 - Did you withdraw funds from CoinChat that were "earned" with such bot?

If you dispute 1, 2 or 5 then why did you admit to them in this thread, and if you dispute 3 or 4 then why did you not dispute these facts in the above thread?

Please do not claim that you purchased the account because just yesterday your post history indicates that you personally participated in the above thread and the OP here is written in a way that says the above thread makes a claim against you personally.

There is no statute of limitation on being a scammer, the fact that a scam happened a long time ago does not matter, the reason negative trust was given recently was because I only saw evidence (admission of guilt) of such a scam recently. Despite your paranoid claims, there is no personal vendetta.

[ACCTseller]

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact.

I gave you a negative trust because I wanted to warn people that you are wanting to make it easier to scam others, even after they have been outed as scammers. This in itself is scammy behavior, but maybe doesn't make it necessary for you to have a "trade with extreme caution tag".

Regardless I do think you are a spammer/scammer and should be warned, especially when you are openly admit to behavior that violated the terms of of CoinChat, made an account that was intentionally confusing to make yourself look innocent and then withdrew funds that you never should have received in the first place.

Hello ACCTseller, thanks for joining the discussion.  It's really sorta weird that you found it worth your while to troll through 3 years of posts in order to rehash lies of tradefortress.  It's certainly not something I'd be very worried about, except that your more powerful alt swooped in to finish the job and get me kicked out of the campaign I was in (again, based on 2.5 year old unsubstantied lies from a known scammer).

What's more, I don't do any trading on here (never have, probably never will).  I mainly use the forum to explore technical questions related to the bitcoin protocol, wallet software, importing/exporting keys, etc.  I occasionally take jobs writing code and fixing up people's websites but again, your trolling perogative wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if it weren't for your more-powerful alter-ego.  I like to take a little extra btc from signature ad campaigns and as you stated in my campaign thread, you wanted to see me kicked out (pretty sure this is because I offended you when I called out quickseller for being a hothead).

Anywhoo, thanks for helping me to exemplify the issues with the power of people on default trust to take out personal vendettas against people they haven't even traded with.  I'm doubtful that anything will be done about it, but I guess I can answer the guy on my other thread in meta with a more personal example now.

Once you're ready to log in as your more powerful alt then we can talk more about how you seem to think that tradefortress' year-old lies are relevant or substantiated or whatever you may argue.  Looking forward to it!

All it took was a simple forum search, it took ~30 seconds, probably longer then it took to think about how to respond to your most recent reply on the ask TF thread to me.

You admitted to scamming TF and coinchat. It does not matter that TF is a scammer. If you scam anyone then you are a scammer. IDK why you are saying TF lied when you admitted to the material facts.

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact. ...

Do you deny it?

The obvious shill account is obvious. I also find it ironic that you created a shill account for the explicit reason to claim that I am a shill

Why should I deny it. It is not my job to prove my innocence. If the OP wants to claim that I am an alt of someone then he can provide evidence. Once he gives that evidence he can explain how this matters to the dispute in hand and how it is against any rules

[Muhammed Zakir]

Lies of TF? You posted you *did* use *bots* to *earn* which is *against TOS*.

Tradefortress' comment was "spammer, defrauded coinchat". Were you using coinchat in the last few months? If so, what were you doing on it?

I used it a few months ago.  I didn't realize until now that 'tradefortress' is 'admin' from coinchat.  So at least this explains part of the puzzle.

I *did* use coinchat a few months ago and I was banned by "admin".  We exchanged some emails in which I asked him what I had done to be banned and I didn't ever get a detailed response.  He said I owed him 0.2BTC if I wanted to be reinstated on coinchat.  I asked him several times where he came up with that number and what I had done wrong.  Each time, however, he just replied tersely about some sort of fraud and paying him back.

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there.  I was sad to get kicked off because I had a lot of fun chatting there and gambling on the various robots.   What I can't understand is how a site that gives money for chatting is going to cry 'fraud'  when I took money for chatting.  I mean, the site gave me money and I cashed it out using the site's system.  How on earth is that fraudulent?
 -snip-

Hi tspacepilot aka wikib0t aka testycat aka newman aka manny on Coinchat,

-last para from above quote-

Excuse the language but bullshit. You were using a bot to send automated messages on coinchat and reaping the rewards fraudulently. You know that is against the rules. Nobody with any intelligence will think it is OK to run a bot to spam coinchat and get rewards. Bots are not allowed to earn rewards, bot accounts must have the name b0t in them and you've tried wikib0t. You've also said you "reviewed the rules" through email on Aug 30 and then tried wikib0t.

I have zero interest in wasting time with spammers who try to lawyer their way out.

If an ATM gives you money you shouldn't have got, legally you're in the wrong.

You don't have to sign a ToS for it to be active. Using the service means that you agree with the ToS. Damn, how can someone be so ignorant as you?
You spammed with a bot to get BTC and now TF wants it back. Sounds legit and logical to me.

My 2 cents.

Well. I am going to stick with TF on this one. He abused the system and broke the rules. Why should anyone trust him if he cannot even follow simple rules? I think its good that TF tells people about it.

@redsn0w: At the time of that post, i.e. 2 years ago, TF was in default trust list and his negative feedback was shown as trusted. However, after he was removed, it went into untrusted feedback. Bumping this will only help users and I think this is appropriate.

[TerminatorXL]

I am not sure what the fact that you think I am alt of Quickseller has to do with anything, nor have I seen you present any proof of this being a fact. ...

Do you deny it?

The obvious shill account is obvious. I also find it ironic that you created a shill account for the explicit reason to claim that I am a shill

Why should I deny it. It is not my job to prove my innocence. If the OP wants to claim that I am an alt of someone then he can provide evidence. Once he gives that evidence he can explain how this matters to the dispute in hand and how it is against any rules

Scumbag:
Unlike yourself, I'll publicly state that I'm in no way associated with OP.
All the circumstantial evidence points to Quickseller being your alt, from registration dates being 3 days apart to your writing stile to subs frequented to posting time.

TL;DR: yeah, both accounts are yours.

[tspacepilot]

Alright tspacepilot scammer, I am not sure why you opened this thread, especially without even a single PM (who is the hothead now?) asking about the trust.

Alright, quicktemper, since you're god here I guess I have no recourse but to plead on my knees for mercy, which is---I'm pretty sure---exactly what you want.

I don't know why you think I'd pm you when you're clearly on a personal vendetta to get me kicked from my sig ad campaign is beyond me.  What would I say, "ok, quickseller, you are god, you have gotten me kicked, I plead for your mercy and forgiveness"?

I will reconsider the trust that I left you. I do however have a few questions that you need to explicitly and clearly answer in order for me to make an evaluation:
1 - Did you use a bot on CoinChat used to automatically make posts?

Uh, with the permission and help of tradefortress, I believe I did.

2 - Did you use the above bot with a username with "b0t" as part of it's handle?

I don't think so, I'm pretty sure I was testing the bot script with my own account, but jeezus, who can remember this.  If I recall correctly, I was trying to make a wikipedia lookup bot to run in the main chat and answer questions.  I don't know if you're old enough to remember coinchat, but there were many bots providing services.

3 - Did you receive anything in writing from anyone, ever, that informed you that you were banned from CoinChat?

Uh, no.  You can see in that thread that you necrod that I wasn't even sure who tradefortress was at the time, much less that he was the admin of coinchat, much less that he had anything to do with me.

4 - Did you receive anything in writing from anyone, ever, that informed you that any bot must have the term "bot" in it's handle?

Nope, again, this is ancient history, but if I recall correctly, I had asked "admin" on coinchat about rules for bots and he never got back to me.  Futhermore, I asked several questions about the bot api and he helped me out.   It's totally nuts for him to accuse me as he did (he made up numbers willy nilly, etc).  He was eventually outed for the person he is.

5 - Did you withdraw funds from CoinChat that were "earned" with such bot?

If I recall correctly, all the coins i withdrew were earned by myself chatting as myself.  I was playing with a bot, under the help of the admin, and not spamming.  Clearly TF says this is untrue, but he's a known scammer.  So, why on earth would you consider this something for you to look into other than your own personal vendetta?



@everybody else, is this how this is supposed to work.  Quickseller didn't like that I accused him of being a hothead and he knew how to use his power to take it out on me.  Now I have to pray to him for forgiveness and if quickselleracctsellerGod is merciful, I will be forgiven and allowed to continue to collect a little change for advertising on bitcointalk.  Is this how default trust is supposed to work?  A guy like me who doesn't do any trading has to pray to a guy with a known hot-temper to hope that he will forgive me and let me go back to getting a little advertising income.  Is this not a clear abuse of default-trust?

[dogie]

"Posts per day online" [PPDO] is a nice indicator of what an account is doing or if its logging in, posting then logging out again. It also highlights how much listening they do alongside their talking, ie if they're just hear to preach about something. Looking at the gif, the PPDO of ACCTSeller is just 12, while the quickseller account is at 35 so that doesn't really make sense to be a shill.

for reference, the really obvious shills can reach 80-110, while generally spammy members can also be found as high as 60-70. Most temperate members will sit around 30-40.

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

Where do we find that PPDO stat at? I am curious what category I fit into! I did the math manualy and I average 6.3 posts per day...not a spammer/shill then \o/

Manually calculate. Post count / time online in days (can see at the top of the page) = PPDO.

Thanks for the info about the index. The other thing I can say about this PPDO index is that in the case of ACCTSeller, the account seems to have been used for very little until recently when it was used for about 24 hours to troll me (it has now gone inactive again).  I don't know if this explains the PPDO numbers you point out (I'm a little slow and I haven't yet understood what those numbers mean).

PPDO isn't affected by bursts of activity / posting because its an entire account's worth of trend setting. When someone views a page, they get 10 (or 15?) minutes of "online" status before the site declares them "offline" again. Those using shills account hop such that they log in, post, and go offline after the automated 10 / 15 minute period has passed.

And just to be clear, PPDO is something I created and its not some well known anti-shil/spaml metric. It does however do a pretty good job at spotting them / spammers and If Theymos ran the numbers against all accounts it would demonstrate some quite clear trends. However do kind in mind that there is also quite a lot of variation depending on the user's chosen subforums which PPDO does NOT take into account. Ie those discussing freely in off topic / speculation will likely have higher PPDO's than those discussing hardware. PPDO could be standardised further to subforum and the demographics in each, but its not data I have access to.

We could discuss this in a spinoff thread if people are interested, propose some variants to increase accuracy / usefulness. Sorry for the derail.

Here are some random PPDO's of the people in the thread:

tspacepilot 206
LaudaM 173
TerminatorXL 72
erikalui 71.4
redsn0w 60.7
Blazedout419 44.3
quickseller 34.7
dogie 16.3
ACCTseller 12.5

[tspacepilot]

>110 megashill / megaspammer
80-110 likely shill
60-70 spammer / 'main' shill account
30-40 normal people
<30 sensible people

[snip]

Here are some random PPDO's of the people in the thread:

tspacepilot 206
LaudaM 173
TerminatorXL 72
erikalui 71.4
redsn0w 60.7
Blazedout419 44.3
quickseller 34.7
dogie 16.3
ACCTseller 12.5

Wow, I'm in the megashill/megaspammer class.  Does this have anything to do with the fact that I clear all cookies/private data when I close my browser?  I only have one other account on bitcointalk and I almost never use it so I'm certainly not hopping back and forth between accounts.  This does seem like a bit of a derail, though.  I'd prefer to keep this focused on getting Quickseller/God removed from default-trust for this kind of abuse.