Wardrick account hacked---trust abuse resolution in sight (finally)

[redsn0w]

Ya it would be nice to get his NT removed from my account

You actually have a case there. He left NT on a few people's profiles. It needs to be determined if it was the real Wardrick. If it wasn't & was a scammer/hacker/imposter than any NT he left since his (whoever it is) return is essentially invalid.

Like my neutral feedback, it's essentially invalid and it is based only upon the Quickseller's thread (link). It's a question of principle so if a feedback is not needed, it's not needed.... simple.

[redsn0w]

Quickseller, please listen to me  . You should remove the word 'professional' from your personal text.


I think Wardrick's forum account was hacked in someway and he is not the real proprietary of the account.

Or there is possiblity too real wardrick sold his account before leaving forum.

If this thing will be confirmed in someway then I think he will be removed from the depth 2 of the DefaultTrust list as soon as possible.

[Quickseller]

Quickseller, please listen to me  . You should remove the word 'professional' from your personal text.


I think Wardrick's forum account was hacked in someway and he is not the real proprietary of the account.

Or there is possiblity too real wardrick sold his account before leaving forum.

If this thing will be confirmed in someway then I think he will be removed from the depth 2 of the DefaultTrust list as soon as possible.

Selling your account is not reason to be removed from DT. There have been other known sold accounts that have been allowed to remain on DT

[dooglus]

Selling your account is not reason to be removed from DT.

How does that make any sense?

If I sold my account I would absolutely expect it to be removed from DefaultTrust.

The new owner should need to build their reputation rather than being allowed to buy someone else's.

I can see that it makes sense not to remove old negative trust when it appears that an account has been sold, because otherwise faking an account sale is an easy way for people to clear their negatives. But allowing positive feedback to stand after an account sale makes no sense as far as I can see.

There have been other known sold accounts that have been allowed to remain on DT

Again with the "those other guys did it so it must be OK for me to do it" argument? That is faulty logic at best.

[redsn0w]

Quickseller, please listen to me  . You should remove the word 'professional' from your personal text.


I think Wardrick's forum account was hacked in someway and he is not the real proprietary of the account.

Or there is possiblity too real wardrick sold his account before leaving forum.

If this thing will be confirmed in someway then I think he will be removed from the depth 2 of the DefaultTrust list as soon as possible.

Selling your account is not reason to be removed from DT. There have been other known sold accounts that have been allowed to remain on DT

So isn't in the DF added _ trusted the 'human/person' behind the account, if a dishonest will buy DT forum account and he is spotted ... then it is normal that he should not be taken seriously/honestly.

I trust the person behind the account, not the account itself.

[Vod]

Examples, or it didn't happen.

Good luck.

[Quickseller]

Selling your account is not reason to be removed from DT.

How does that make any sense?

If I sold my account I would absolutely expect it to be removed from DefaultTrust.

The new owner should need to build their reputation rather than being allowed to buy someone else's.

I can see that it makes sense not to remove old negative trust when it appears that an account has been sold, because otherwise faking an account sale is an easy way for people to clear their negatives. But allowing positive feedback to stand after an account sale makes no sense as far as I can see.

There have been other known sold accounts that have been allowed to remain on DT

Again with the "those other guys did it so it must be OK for me to do it" argument? That is faulty logic at best.

It is not against any rules to sell your account. If the person sponsoring the sold account still trusts the ratings of that account then there would be no reason to remove them.

[tmfp]

<snip> If the person sponsoring the sold account still trusts the ratings of that account then there would be no reason to remove them.

You do this a lot: type in English but make no sense.

[tspacepilot]

Selling your account is not reason to be removed from DT. There have been other known sold accounts that have been allowed to remain on DT

Examples, or it didn't happen.

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account (he revealed it's identity because he couldn't resist doing a little sockpuppetry/trolling of me while using it).  If you look at the post history of this account (assuming QS doesn't immediately delete posts), it suggests that the DT account was sold.  I can't speak to what account it was or whether it remained on the DT list.  I'm guessing QS isn't going to tell but who knows, maybe someone else will.

This post is pretty entertaining because you can see QS doing his now signature move of discussing something with himself using multiple accounts.

[Vod]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

[redsn0w]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Really? Only a crazy person talks to himself.... or am I wrong?

[ajareselde]

<snip> If the person sponsoring the sold account still trusts the ratings of that account then there would be no reason to remove them.

You do this a lot: type in English but make no sense.

He's saying that if the person who bought the account trusts the people the previous owner trusted, there's no reason to remove those ratings that are left by original owner.
I got that, but since the account in question was on DT afaik, that only goes half way, because the new owner has the ability to leave ratings that are considered trusted, w/o "earning" that ability.

So it's a no-go on this one. DT account's - by forum rules or not, should definitely not be traded and remain on DT. (imho none should, but DT is where the line must be drawn)

cheers

[Quickseller]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

[Vod]

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

I don't.  Your not denying it tells me it's true. 

[jonald_fyookball]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

yeah they could be a 17 year old girl who doesn't know the first thing about professional escrow.   

[ajareselde]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

yeah they could be a 17 year old girl who doesn't know the first thing about professional escrow.   

You could add everyone who's not hiding their IRL identity to that list, which is virtually everyone on this forum.

[itsamemario]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

yeah they could be a 17 year old girl who doesn't know the first thing about professional escrow.   

This guy is an account farmer, don't trust him.

[tmfp]

This is an alt account QS created in order to sell a DT account

FunFunnyFan?  If this is true, then QS is talking to himself again.  What a tangled web we weave, when we post to deceive.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1077025.msg11603776#msg11603776

Edit:   Exact same post TSP linked to.  Sorry TSP.

You shouldn't believe everything that others tell you on the internet

yeah they could be a 17 year old girl who doesn't know the first thing about professional escrow.   

This guy is an account farmer, don't trust him.

Which guy would that be?

Seeing as everyone is being accused of something around here, you have to be clear with your finger pointing or everything just gets confusing and goes to shit: we may end up lynching the wrong person, that would never do.

[gentlemand]

Everyone's account should begin with negative trust of several million and be forced to slowly dig their way out of it.

[TheButterZone]

Everyone's account should begin with negative trust of several million and be forced to slowly dig their way out of it.

21 million risked BTC, to be precise, then as they build trust based on the amount of BTC they were trusted with and didn't screw anyone out of it, that is subtracted as a negative number from the -21 million (ex. (-21000000)-(-5)=-20999995). Any risked and lost BTC negative rated as such will be added back as a negative number (ex. (-20999995)+(-5)=-21000000) . Unfortunately, there's no evidence required of BTC transfers, and no way to prove all the private keys involved in the transfers weren't exclusively controlled by the same person using different usernames.