Quickseller escrowing for himself

[Mitchell]

Lying about being banned and not doing escrow how it's supposed to be done (with a neutral third party) is shady at best and I've left a negative accordingly. I trust(ed) you QS and I don't mind (too much) if people have alt accounts, but stuff like this I just can't accept. I might change my rating to a neutral in the future, but for now it will stay as it is.

The stuff about TC is something I'll have to read into. I'm not done yet.

[1715075574]

1715075574

[1715075574]

1715075574

[1715075574]

1715075574

[Decoded]

lol no I just do it for the cost of the Tx.

In other words the seller pays for it?

Hey man... I'm all for making moves and bending shit, but god damn that seems shitty.

Esp when you spend as much time busting peoples nuts as you used to until QS came along.

It does not matter who pays for the escrow. A financially rational person will care about how much money leaves their wallet (or how much money goes into their wallet). They will not care that a portion of the money from/to the other party goes to an escrow service.

so isnt it like buying positive feedback and/or stealing extra bucks from the person who used you as escrow and trusted you with their money thinking you are a "third party"?

[Quickseller]

lol no I just do it for the cost of the Tx.

In other words the seller pays for it?

Hey man... I'm all for making moves and bending shit, but god damn that seems shitty.

Esp when you spend as much time busting peoples nuts as you used to until QS came along.

It does not matter who pays for the escrow. A financially rational person will care about how much money leaves their wallet (or how much money goes into their wallet). They will not care that a portion of the money from/to the other party goes to an escrow service.

so isnt it like buying positive feedback and/or stealing extra bucks from the person who used you as escrow and trusted you with their money thinking you are a "third party"?

No. If I am buying a widget from you it does not matter if you are selling it for $101 and you cover the escrow fee, or if you are selling it for $100, but I cover the escrow fee. Either way you receive the same $100.

Furthermore, you are additional comfortable with the transaction because you know the escrow is going to stake their reputation on the outcome being fair, so even if they are biased in any dispute, an unfair resolution to an escrowed deal means that their reputation will suffer. 

[Bardman]

lol no I just do it for the cost of the Tx.

In other words the seller pays for it?

Hey man... I'm all for making moves and bending shit, but god damn that seems shitty.

Esp when you spend as much time busting peoples nuts as you used to until QS came along.

It does not matter who pays for the escrow. A financially rational person will care about how much money leaves their wallet (or how much money goes into their wallet). They will not care that a portion of the money from/to the other party goes to an escrow service.

so isnt it like buying positive feedback and/or stealing extra bucks from the person who used you as escrow and trusted you with their money thinking you are a "third party"?

No. If I am buying a widget from you it does not matter if you are selling it for $101 and you cover the escrow fee, or if you are selling it for $100, but I cover the escrow fee. Either way you receive the same $100.

Furthermore, you are additional comfortable with the transaction because you know the escrow is going to stake their reputation on the outcome being fair, so even if they are biased in any dispute, an unfair resolution to an escrowed deal means that their reputation will suffer. 

Come on now, you could just have used your main account from the start to do the transaction instead of using an alt account and then this one for escrowing, i dont see the point other than trying to make your other accout more trusted

[Quickseller]

lol no I just do it for the cost of the Tx.

In other words the seller pays for it?

Hey man... I'm all for making moves and bending shit, but god damn that seems shitty.

Esp when you spend as much time busting peoples nuts as you used to until QS came along.

It does not matter who pays for the escrow. A financially rational person will care about how much money leaves their wallet (or how much money goes into their wallet). They will not care that a portion of the money from/to the other party goes to an escrow service.

so isnt it like buying positive feedback and/or stealing extra bucks from the person who used you as escrow and trusted you with their money thinking you are a "third party"?

No. If I am buying a widget from you it does not matter if you are selling it for $101 and you cover the escrow fee, or if you are selling it for $100, but I cover the escrow fee. Either way you receive the same $100.

Furthermore, you are additional comfortable with the transaction because you know the escrow is going to stake their reputation on the outcome being fair, so even if they are biased in any dispute, an unfair resolution to an escrowed deal means that their reputation will suffer. 

Come on now, you could just have used your main account from the start to do the transaction instead of using an alt account and then this one for escrowing, i dont see the point other than trying to make your other accout more trusted

No. There are plenty of reasons. One would be that you are buying something that requires shipment to a physical address and do not want someone who may turn out to be out to get you to have your name/address. A second reason is that some people may feel uncomfortable trading with a scam hunter, even if they can trust their money with such scam hunter.....There are many people (I suspect they are most likely alts of scammers, however I have no evidence of this) who like to spread FUD that if they trade with me that I will automatically "mark their account with red trust for no reason" or will "dox them for no reason", even though both of these statement are untrue and ridiculous. As a result of this some people may feel more comfortable trading with a trading partner of someone who is not a scam hunter, and then using an escrow who is a scam hunter (and reputable).

A third reason may be that I am wanting to sell an item at a price that is meant to move quickly (eg I need money quickly), and I do not wish to disclose my immediate need for money. I do not think it would be unreasonable to use an alt to hide this fact. This has never been the case for me personally, however I am trying to list legitimate reasons.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Fundamentally there is no issue with escrowing someone's own trade. When someone gets an escrow, they are paying for a guarantee (upheld based on someone's reputation) that they won't be scammed. Escrowing your own trade's while not disclosing that *could* be perceived as shady, but it's actually not in reality. Reputable sellers often can sell for a price premium, which is partially based on the fees saved from not having to escrow. The buyer just paid for this "reputation premium" through escrow fees instead.

As for the original post in this thread, the data modelling is completely worthless as it has clearly been contaminated with confirmation bias. OP is a scammer and he should have a negative trust rating.

As for Quickseller faking a ban... meh. I would not say xyr's a scammer or deserve negative feedback because of it, but it's understandable why certain people like BadBear would no longer hold xyr into his DefaultTrust list.

[jonald_fyookball]

I would be interested to hear more about the confirmation bias you speak of.

Not that it matters since QS rightfully fessed up.

[tmfp]

Fundamentally there is no issue with escrowing someone's own trade.

Oh really?
What else don't you Fundamentally have issues with?
Stealing?
Blackmail?
Lying?

With friends like you, QS doesn't need enemies.
GTFO.

[Zackgeno96]

Fundamentally there is no issue with escrowing someone's own trade. When someone gets an escrow, they are paying for a guarantee (upheld based on someone's reputation) that they won't be scammed. Escrowing your own trade's while not disclosing that *could* be perceived as shady, but it's actually not in reality. Reputable sellers often can sell for a price premium, which is partially based on the fees saved from not having to escrow. The buyer just paid for this "reputation premium" through escrow fees instead.

As for the original post in this thread, the data modelling is completely worthless as it has clearly been contaminated with confirmation bias. OP is a scammer and he should have a negative trust rating.

As for Quickseller faking a ban... meh. I would not say xyr's a scammer or deserve negative feedback because of it, but it's understandable why certain people like BadBear would no longer hold xyr into his DefaultTrust list.

things just got interesting time for some popcorn, i know it's been 2+years but how's that stack of 5000 btc you stole can we see a pic of how you spent it, really i'm curious, or did you blow it all on cocaine and hookers?  

[james.lent]

Things just got interesting. ...

[Kanapka]

Strange see QS and TF defending each other, at the point of QS being damaged by losing is green trus, being taken off of default trust and having his escrow closed in practice.

Some people would suspect that QS and TF are somehow related

[Tomatocage]

TC is a nice guy and A+ escrow
(5btc risked, months ago, buying graphic cards)

What happened?

Nothing has changed. It's just that a situation came up where it appears that I was escrowing for myself (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12363857#msg12363857) using a different account. There's some back story to it, and if you listen to me tell it again, you'd probably go, "Riiiiiiight."

[onemorexmr]

TC is a nice guy and A+ escrow
(5btc risked, months ago, buying graphic cards)

What happened?

Nothing has changed. It's just that a situation came up where it appears that I was escrowing for myself (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12363857#msg12363857) using a different account. There's some back story to it, and if you listen to me tell it again, you'd probably go, "Riiiiiiight."

dont forget to tell that you still think that escrowing for yourself is fine!
i still hope you change your mind on that matter though...

even if i dont think you ever did escrow for yourself IMHO its unacceptable for someone on default trust to say that.

[Tomatocage]

TC is a nice guy and A+ escrow
(5btc risked, months ago, buying graphic cards)

What happened?

Nothing has changed. It's just that a situation came up where it appears that I was escrowing for myself (see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12363857#msg12363857) using a different account. There's some back story to it, and if you listen to me tell it again, you'd probably go, "Riiiiiiight."

dont forget to tell that you still think that escrowing for yourself is fine!
i still hope you change your mind on that matter though...

even if i dont think you ever did escrow for yourself IMHO its unacceptable for someone on default trust to say that.

Yes, under very situational conditions, escrowing for oneself is ok (though this is really just a deal where the counterparty sends first), and I believe that QS would qualify for those conditions. Granted, the other 99.999% of the time setting up a fake "3rd" party escrow is clearly a scam. What happens is that funds are sent to escrow agent, who also happens to be controlled by the buyer. Once the goods are sent by the seller, the buyer and escrow disappear, never to be heard from again. However, this doesn't appear to be the case with QS.

That being said, I wouldn't expect anybody to understand the reasoning behind my opinion on the matter. I certainly hope nobody would find themselves in a position where they would understand either.

[tspacepilot]

Yes, under very situational conditions, escrowing for oneself is ok (though this is really just a deal where the counterparty sends first),...

Right, but if the counterparty doesn't know that they're sending first (because they think they're sending to a neutral, third-party) then that seems like a pretty dishonest move.  If you're collecting an escrow fee from that counterparty then it's all the more shady.  Just my opinion.

[onemorexmr]

Yes, under very situational conditions, escrowing for oneself is ok (though this is really just a deal where the counterparty sends first), and I believe that QS would qualify for those conditions.

no
 - QS took escow fee (even though he is now willing to send it back)
 - in case of QS other party did NEVER know it was dealing with the same person

it is essentially lying. look up the word escrow in any dictionary and it states THIRD PARTY.

[tsoPANos]

Yes, under very situational conditions, escrowing for oneself is ok (though this is really just a deal where the counterparty sends first),...

Right, but if the counterparty doesn't know that they're sending first (because they think they're sending to a neutral, third-party) then that seems like a pretty dishonest move.  If you're collecting an escrow fee from that counterparty then it's all the more shady.  Just my opinion.

Did Quickseller collect an escorw fee from that counterparty?
If so, that indeed is very shady. In that case, he deserves red trust.
It would be a steal, as the escrow service is fictional.

Once again, I am deeply disappointed at how immoral people here are.  

[siameze]

Fundamentally there is no issue with escrowing someone's own trade. When someone gets an escrow, they are paying for a guarantee (upheld based on someone's reputation) that they won't be scammed. Escrowing your own trade's while not disclosing that *could* be perceived as shady, but it's actually not in reality. Reputable sellers often can sell for a price premium, which is partially based on the fees saved from not having to escrow. The buyer just paid for this "reputation premium" through escrow fees instead.

As for the original post in this thread, the data modelling is completely worthless as it has clearly been contaminated with confirmation bias. OP is a scammer and he should have a negative trust rating.

As for Quickseller faking a ban... meh. I would not say xyr's a scammer or deserve negative feedback because of it, but it's understandable why certain people like BadBear would no longer hold xyr into his DefaultTrust list.

TradeFortress, instructing bitcointalk in what not to do in bitcoin business since 2013. 

[suchmoon]

No matter which way you cut it escrowing your own transaction is deceitful, illegal, and compromises the safety of the other party. This entire situation has shown that anonymous escrows should not be used. Human escrow is fine if someone has great reputation AND their identity is known.

I have learned that anyone who is completely anonymous when doing business usually has bad intentions (if not always), they know at some point they are going to commit a crime so they never let other traders know their name. I have been burned multiple times by completely anonymous people on the internet, never by someone who let their identity be known.

That just shows you haven't been on the internet long enough 

Karpeles or Garza for example. The latter had an interesting view on escrow as well:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.msg10122712#msg10122712

I don't get why QS and TC didn't use another escrow for their alt's trading. Penny wise pound foolish?

[redsn0w]

No matter which way you cut it escrowing your own transaction is deceitful, illegal, and compromises the safety of the other party. This entire situation has shown that anonymous escrows should not be used. Human escrow is fine if someone has great reputation AND their identity is known.

I have learned that anyone who is completely anonymous when doing business usually has bad intentions (if not always), they know at some point they are going to commit a crime so they never let other traders know their name. I have been burned multiple times by completely anonymous people on the internet, never by someone who let their identity be known.

That just shows you haven't been on the internet long enough 

Karpeles or Garza for example. The latter had an interesting view on escrow as well:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=857670.msg10122712#msg10122712

I don't get why QS and TC didn't use another escrow for their alt's trading. Penny wise pound foolish?

You should ask to them (privately or better publicly).