Quickseller escrowing for himself

[Quickseller]

And I bet that if it was TSP that was caught self escrowing he would be deep in negative trust (quite possibly including one from QuickSeller) for that scammy behavior. He'd get hit harder than either QuickSeller or TomatoCage.

I don't think so considering that both TC and QS are of the opinion that self escrowing is not a scam. Unless they are hypocrites, though I have seen nothing to suggest they are.

Just a few posts ago...

...99.999% of the time setting up a fake "3rd" party escrow is clearly a scam.

He was talking about a situation in which resulted in money being sent to escrow and then the escrow running away with the money. This was not the case in this situation. Both at the time of the trade, and now, the other party was appearing to be happy with the trade.

[1714634248]

1714634248

[1714634248]

1714634248

[1714634248]

1714634248

[1714634248]

1714634248

[tmfp]

It is certainly very concerning as to how many accounts I have suspected of being scammers (yet have no proof) have posted in this thread.

It is also unfortunate that as of when I had faked my ban, the overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal and that you should assume this is going to happen.....however once it was discovered that I was in fact Panthers (and was self escrowing), all the vultures moved in saying that this is such a horrible thing to do......

When was it "the overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal"? In what place was this establised?
The only people that I've read who think it's "no big deal" are you, TC (because roommate?) and TradeFortress.

Now, anyone who holds the incredibly-difficult-to-understand view that an escrow should be a third party, is implied by you to be a vulture and/or likely to be a scammer.
This complete inability you have to see the validity of any criticism of yourself, to accept that your behavior can possibly be seen as unacceptable by members of a community out of which you have made a lot of money, is the most important revelation in this drama.

[ndnh]

And I bet that if it was TSP that was caught self escrowing he would be deep in negative trust (quite possibly including one from QuickSeller) for that scammy behavior. He'd get hit harder than either QuickSeller or TomatoCage.

I don't think so considering that both TC and QS are of the opinion that self escrowing is not a scam. Unless they are hypocrites, though I have seen nothing to suggest they are.

Just a few posts ago...

...99.999% of the time setting up a fake "3rd" party escrow is clearly a scam.

He was talking about a situation in which resulted in money being sent to escrow and then the escrow running away with the money. This was not the case in this situation. Both at the time of the trade, and now, the other party was appearing to be happy with the trade.

It is more tending towards discouraging the practice than whether you actually did scam someone.

The reason for the negative trust was dishonesty, faking weird things, shady behavior and not following practices trusted people are expected to. Not because you scammed anyone.

[Blazr]

When was it "the overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal"? In what place was this establised?

Right before the forum got full of all these shitposts by a bunch of scammers.

(I do escrow seomtimes but never for myself, however I do not see how self escrowing alone constitutes a scam. The scam happens when the escrow and buyer/seller collude, that can happen if they are the same person or not.)

[tmfp]

When was it "the overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal"? In what place was this establised?

Right before the forum got full of all these shitposts by a bunch of scammers.

(I do escrow seomtimes but never for myself, however I do not see how self escrowing alone constitutes a scam. The scam happens when the escrow and buyer/seller collude, that can happen if they are the same person or not.)

I didn't say it was a scam, I've said that I believe that it is a "big deal" when the supposed third party in a deal turns out to be the person you are dealing with.
Why do you find that a difficult viewpoint for someone to sincerely hold? Why does me thinking that make me a shitposting scammer in your eyes?

[Blazr]

I didn't say it was a scam, I've said that I believe that it is a "big deal" when the supposed third party in a deal turns out to be the person you are dealing with.
Why do you find that a difficult viewpoint for someone to sincerely hold? Why does me thinking that make me a shitposting scammer in your eyes?

I'm sorry I wasn't specifically calling you a shitposting scammer. I do not think your posts are of poor quality nor do I know if you are a scammer or not.

The reason this issue is being discussed at length is because certain users/scammers here will do anything to get their much deserved negative trust removed and are throwing everything they can at the people on DT who are tagging them. QS for example has had many accusations fired against him over the past while from just a handful of people posting under multiple accounts. There are many accounts here I would like to tag but I fear doing so as I know what it will lead to - they will do the same against me, it's already somewhat. This is why I am upset about what is going on here, it undermines the trust system.

[ndnh]

The reason this issue is being discussed at length is because certain users/scammers here will do anything to get their much deserved negative trust removed and are throwing everything they can at the people on DT who are tagging them. QS for example has had many accusations fired against him over the past while from just a handful of people posting under multiple accounts. There are many accounts here I would like to tag but I fear doing so as I know what it will lead to - they will do the same against me, it's already somewhat started. This is why I am upset about what is going on here, it undermines the trust system.

So your idea is basically, do not remove anyone from DT whatever happens? Or add everyone to it?

You needn't be so concerned about QS, he might coincidentally get back into DT after a couple of months. Nothing much to worry about.

[erikalui]

This thread really proves that none can be trusted. Dint get still why QS has to lie about it and escrow his own deal using an alt. He lost all his reputation in seconds and on top he charged his escrow fee too? Is it all the facts he has been stating about an escrow ensures safety and people should trust it flushed out completely? I'm speechless.


It's better if he discards his thread in the Currency Exchange section. Makes no sense now "Trade with caution: Use Escrow".

And Tomatocage has done the same and he even left a good rating on his other alt account when the trade happened, he should get a negative trust rating aswell.

edit: i see he actually got a neg trust rating and wardrick decided to give him a positive trust rating, pretty suspicious.

I don't get the positive rating left on the accounts but however, I guess TC has accepted way back that he did in. Contradicting this, QS dint accept that and kept lying about it. He collected the escrow fee as well which makes it even worse.


Self escrowing is not a good practise if one does believe in such things. If the other party doesn't trust you, you can't start escrowing your own deal and then charge a fee to make it look legit. People who believe in self escrowing and then lying about it is all fine, I have no words except that's too immature. Scamming or not scamming is not the case here but it's the case of being an honest person who one can trust. A LIAR cannot be trusted whatsover.

[zazarb]

Considerations only...scam -when one side loses money or or attempt to do so. Excluding  ethics in this situaton QS being victim, he loss reputation , trust and at the same time and money.
I do not know the other victims.

[Shadow_Runner]

TC should come clean though. The evidence is clear cut they were the same person, and the overall community reaction is currently negative regarding self escrowing. (this is contrary to when I had faked my ban, as the overall reaction was either neutral, users were saying it was no big deal, or people were saying that you should assume this is the case).

I bet if it was TSP that was caught self escrowing then all of the shills would be claiming its completely fine to do that.

It is hard to say for sure. It is certainly very concerning as to how many accounts I have suspected of being scammers (yet have no proof) have posted in this thread.

It is also unfortunate that as of when I had faked my ban, the overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal and that you should assume this is going to happen.....however once it was discovered that I was in fact Panthers (and was self escrowing), all the vultures moved in saying that this is such a horrible thing to do......

The same way you ruined peoples reputation based off assumptions. You don't get treated equally when your treat people like you do.

[suchmoon]

overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal

Or you can just disclose the fact that you're self-escrowing here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1022656

By that logic it shouldn't affect your business much. Sounds like a fair deal. Full transparency, properly informed customers.

[Quickseller]

overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal

Or you can just disclose the fact that you're self-escrowing here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1022656

By that logic it shouldn't affect your business much. Sounds like a fair deal. Full transparency, properly informed customers.

Sure, I can do that.

edit: How does this sound.

No representations are made as to the identity of the person you are trading with, this includes the possibility of trading with an alt of QS, as well as trading with someone other then you believe them to be. Regardless, I will stake my reputation on me resolving any disputes as fairly as possible while taking into consideration all available facts, and giving large amounts of time for both parties to gather/present any evidence.

edit2: I do plan on taking a break for a while, so it is kinda a moot point, at least for now, but I do see your point.

[suchmoon]

overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal

Or you can just disclose the fact that you're self-escrowing here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1022656

By that logic it shouldn't affect your business much. Sounds like a fair deal. Full transparency, properly informed customers.

Sure, I can do that.

edit: How does this sound.

No representations are made as to the identity of the person you are trading with, this includes the possibility of trading with an alt of QS, as well as trading with someone other then you believe them to be. Regardless, I will stake my reputation on me resolving any disputes as fairly as possible while taking into consideration all available facts, and giving large amounts of time for both parties to gather/present any evidence.

edit2: I do plan on taking a break for a while, so it is kinda a moot point, at least for now, but I do see your point.

IANAL but to me that sounds like a reasonable explanation. I hope other escrows will add something like that, or the opposite, depending on their view on the subject.

[Quickseller]

overall consensus was that self escrowing was no big deal

Or you can just disclose the fact that you're self-escrowing here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1022656

By that logic it shouldn't affect your business much. Sounds like a fair deal. Full transparency, properly informed customers.

Sure, I can do that.

edit: How does this sound.

No representations are made as to the identity of the person you are trading with, this includes the possibility of trading with an alt of QS, as well as trading with someone other then you believe them to be. Regardless, I will stake my reputation on me resolving any disputes as fairly as possible while taking into consideration all available facts, and giving large amounts of time for both parties to gather/present any evidence.

edit2: I do plan on taking a break for a while, so it is kinda a moot point, at least for now, but I do see your point.

IANAL but to me that sounds like a reasonable explanation. I hope other escrows will add something like that, or the opposite, depending on their view on the subject.

I agree. Although with or without such a disclosure, and even with a disclosure to the opposite, people should assume that there is the possibility of trading with the escrow themselves.

[tspacepilot]

Right before the forum got full of all these shitposts by a bunch of scammers.

(I do escrow seomtimes but never for myself, however I do not see how self escrowing alone constitutes a scam. The scam happens when the escrow and buyer/seller collude, that can happen if they are the same person or not.)

Blazr, I have to respectfully disagree.  I think you've got something a little backwards.  If the escrow and one of the two parties are the same person, isn't that the definition of collusion?  How can I fail to collude with myself?  I am myself and my interests are not separate from me nor is my communication separate from me.  How can a "third-party" escrow communicate with one party privately if the other party is also the escrow.

There seems to be two schools of though here, one espoused by QS and Tradefortress (and maybe, hedgingly, TC), which is that when you choose X as escrow, X guarantees on X's reputation that the deal will go smoothly.  The other school of thought, seemingly held by nearly everyone else, is tha an escrow X gurantees to provide a neutral, third-party mediator to manage the deal and any conflicts which might arise.

I personally cannot understand the QS and Tradefortress' opinion here that an escrow is guaranteeing on their own reputation that a deal will go smoothly.  Surely the escrow cannot be held responsible if one party or the other fails to pay, or fails to send, or sends the wrong amount, or any other failure.  Surely what the escrow is guranteeing is that in those cases where some dispute arises, that the escrow will act neutrally to resolve the dispute, or else cancel the deal amicably.  I don't see how it could be any more clear that an escrow who isn't without a conflict of interest is critical for this role.  The idea that you could escrow for yourself and not be in collusion with yourself seems, pardon me, like nonsense.

He was talking about a situation in which resulted in money being sent to escrow and then the escrow running away with the money. This was not the case in this situation. Both at the time of the trade, and now, the other party was appearing to be happy with the trade.

So, QS, for you, if a person steals from you and you don't realize it then nothing was wrong with that?  You still can't seem to see that if someone pays you to provide a service as a neutral third party, and you hid the fact that you weren't a neutral third party, and then you went ahead and received money for that service, that that is clearly dishonest and stealing.  It doesn't matter if you duped your victim completely and the walked away without realizing it.

Finally, I have to tell you brought this on yourself, if you hadn't continued to pull in alt-after-alt into that crazy personal vendetta you have against me then I would never found your alts.  I don't generally look into any of this stuff.  The fact that you couldn't keep your personal vendettas and your escrow-scam separate is what led to your downfall here.  If you could calm that hot temper, you might have gotten away with it perpetually.  Who knows?  That doesn't make it right to do so, but it's true that no one was really looking.

Finally, after the pages and pages that QS has written to me about alts scams and fake reputation building by doing micro trades here and there to build trust, one has to acknowledge at least a small bit of irony, as it seems like that's exactly what you were doing here.  You continue to build reputation for your various accounts by doing small, risckless trades where the other person has to send first because they don't know you're the escrow.  What you were planning on using all these account for beyond just picking on people and sockpuppeting your hatred, I don't know.  Nevertheless, some of the irony in this has to be acknolwedged.

Here's one of the many posts where QS explains the trust-farming-scam he was actually apparrantely pulling himself: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1163292.msg12303462#msg12303462
Here's one that's chock full of irony as he pulls in a new alt in the thread about his longstanding abuse of me and he uses the sockpuppet to, wait for it, accuse me using sockpuppets! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1129059.msg12312926#msg12312926

I think QS' true character has finally been revealed to the masses, and that's probably a good thing for the community here.

[EcuaMobi]

Right before the forum got full of all these shitposts by a bunch of scammers.

(I do escrow seomtimes but never for myself, however I do not see how self escrowing alone constitutes a scam. The scam happens when the escrow and buyer/seller collude, that can happen if they are the same person or not.)

Blazr, I have to respectfully disagree.  I think you've got something a little backwards.  If the escrow and one of the two parties are the same person, isn't that the definition of collusion?  How can I fail to collude with myself?  I am myself and my interests are not separate from me nor is my communication separate from me.  How can a "third-party" escrow communicate with one party privately if the other party is also the escrow.

...

I really think you're overreacting because of your previous problems with QS. Colluding may be understood as just "acting together" with somebody, with that definition escrowing for yourself is definitely a collusion but it's not necessarily a scam. However I think the most accepted definition of collusion includes "with evil or harmful intent" or "to conspire in a fraud", in this case escrowing for yourself is not collusion; you're colluding only if you do harm (i.e. scam) somebody else by acting together with your other self (i.e. your alt). So escrowing for yourself is just the first step that could end on a collusion.

That said, I reiterate I'd prefer to use an escrow that never escrows for himself and I'd definitely wouldn't do it myself. I find this activity unacceptable and far from transparent. But saying someone that does that (and doesn't steal money or do harm while doing it) is necessarily a scammer or similar is an exaggeration.

[Quickseller]

Lol. You did not find my alt. you were tipped off about Panthers being my alt. You were told to delete the PMs (and so would the person who you were messaging) so the PMs would be deleted from the forums DB. However both you and the person you were colluding with vastly underestimated me.

The "test" that you ran was run in multiple ways and you picked the one that gave the results that you were looking for. Then you continued to run similar tests on other accounts until you found three others that gave you the results you were looking for. Your test is scientifically invalid and your hypothesis was not sufficiently tested and the reason you did not test it was because doing so would not give the results you are looking for. There is a reason why you did not "run more tests tomorrow" as you promised to do several days ago. Your setup is sufficiently complex so that it would be unlikely that anyone would even check your work to make sure the results that you claim to have gotten is what you actually got (nor for others to be able to run similar tests on others). I also have my doubts that you actually were able to design this test yourself, although I will not go as far as to say that you did not personally run these tests.

[tspacepilot]

I really think you're overreacting because of your previous problems with QS. Colluding may be understood as just "acting together" with somebody, with that definition escrowing for yourself is definitely a collusion but it's not necessarily a scam. However I think the most accepted definition of collusion includes "with evil or harmful intent" or "to conspire in a fraud", in this case escrowing for yourself is not collusion; you're colluding only if you do harm (i.e. scam) somebody else by acting together with your other self (i.e. your alt). So escrowing for yourself is just the first step that could end on a collusion.

You're right that QS' behavior towards me for the last 6 months has certainly earned him a special place in my heart.  And I was sorta trying to emphasize that by pointing out that if he hadn't been harrassing me with all of his sockpuppet accounts, I certainly wouldn't have ever run across his self-escrow scheme.

With respect to scams, it seems to me that taking an escrow fee while leaving the other party out of the loop is the definition of taking money for a service and not providing that service.  QS has said several times in this thread that if his victim/trading-party was unaware of the fact, then there's no harm done and no foul.  He references something he calls "efficient markets" and says that the only thing a rational person cares about is how much money leaves or enters his wallet.  I think those statements together betray a sort of dangerous sollipcism.  he stil doesn't seem to understand that for a person who hired him as escrow, that person was expecting that both parties send to an escrow, not to have to send first.  That person paid money to him to mitigate risk and he pocketed that money without providing the risk abatement insurance that a third party could provide.  Even now as he writes about this he states that "he is always fair", "he is never wrong because he's so careful".  These statments seem to betray the fact that he can't realize that fairness is also a matter of prespective.  That it's impossible to be objective as humans, that his perspective comes with his own bias (as do each of our perspectives).  I leave people to judge for themselves what his statements, his actions with sockpupets, not to mention his trust ratings betray about his ability to act with impartiality or neutrality.  I think it's good that this stuff has seen the light of day.

That said, yes, I'm probably overreacting

That said, I reiterate I'd prefer to use an escrow that never escrows for himself and I'd definitely wouldn't do it myself. I find this activity unacceptable and far from transparent. But saying someone that does that (and doesn't steal money or do harm while doing it) is necessarily a scammer or similar is an exaggeration.

I mainly agree with you, but I think that (1) QS did steal money in this case, whereas there's no evidence to suggest that TC has done so; (2) the ability to decide when you've done harm is biased, and no one should be allowed to be both arbiter and party to the argument.  People who think they can do so either haven't really thought it out, or they're nuts.

Lol. You did not find my alt. you were tipped off about Panthers being my alt. You were told to delete the PMs (and so would the person who you were messaging) so the PMs would be deleted from the forums DB.  

I don't know what you're talking about here, man.  I think the paranoia is perhaps overtaking you.   Lol, now that I think about it, who would have tipped me anyway?  Did you tell someone that Panther52 was your alt?  I don't think you realize something about yourself man:

1) you have a distinctive way with words (cf. the quantification of this in the OP)
2) your persecution of me was outlandish and over-the-top

Put these toegether and it's really not that hard to see what's going on when an account I've otherwise had no contact with starts PMing me about havesting my transaction details and bitcoin addresses with vague motivations like 'maybe I can help'.  Or when that guy starts leaving me ranting PMs saying that I'm nothing but an off-topic posting scammer, but he can get me some deals on a lealanna coin.  Comeon man, you have to try to step outside of yourself once in a while to see how others perceive you.  And when that guys shows up in the thread accusing quickseller of trust abuse and starts ranting about the same exact things that Quickseller has been doing to try to distract from the matter at hand, it was really more than obvious to anyone who was looking.  As I said to you then, are you sure you want to keep pulling more and more alts into this?  I mentioned at the time that I was surprised you were going to end up outing an alt you were doing escrows for.

However both you and the person you were colluding with vastly underestimated me. Mwa ha haaaa!

FTFY.

The "test" that you ran was run in multiple ways and you picked the one that gave the results that you were looking for. Then you continued to run similar tests on other accounts until you found three others that gave you the results you were looking for.

Were you in my room living on my computer?  Here you go again proclaiming "facts" you have no pertenence to.

Your test is scientifically invalid and your hypothesis was not sufficiently tested and the reason you did not test it was because doing so would not give the results you are looking for. There is a reason why you did not "run more tests tomorrow" as you promised to do several days ago.

You're right.  The reason is that you fessed up.  Why do more experiments to verify the already verified?

Your setup is sufficiently complex so that it would be unlikely that anyone would even check your work to make sure the results that you claim to have gotten is what you actually got (nor for others to be able to run similar tests on others). I also have my doubts that you actually were able to design this test yourself, although I will not go as far as to say that you did not personally run these tests.

Lol, I love it.  I'm clearly too stoopid to do anything clever, ever.  You're probably right.  If you decide to use that superior intellect of yours to build you own language models for youself, the instructions are in the OP.  PM me if you need help.

[Quickseller]

Are you willing to put 5BTC into escrow that would be due me and to leave forever if I can prove my allegations to be correct? Do you explicitly deny my allegations?

[tspacepilot]

Are you willing to put 5BTC into escrow that would be due me and to leave forever if I can prove my allegations to be correct? Do you explicitly deny my allegations?

You'll have to be more serious in stating what your accusations are if you want me to confirm or deny them.  I don't think that  allegations like "I have a vastly superior intellect" are really provable.  And anyway, are you putting up 5BTC on this bet?

Or is this just like more of the mockery you were pulling here, where you were "offering" to pay someone to convince you of something you clearly can't be convinced of.

If you (or anyone else for that matter) can explain how you are not a scammer based on the evidence (and convince me as such) then I will gladly remove my negative rating against you and send the first person to post an explanation in this thread 0.1BTC, I'll keep this offer open until the sooner of 48 hours from this post or when this thread gets locked. You need to convince me in order to claim the bounty. If no one is willing to write a single post for .1 btc to explain your innocence within at most 48 hours then it will be appropriate to warn others to avoid interacting with you.

^^^This kind of stuff is clearly trolling.  As is the idea that I'm going to give you 5BTC in order for "prove your allegations".  If you have allegations to prove, why not just prove them?   Your chest-banging and bluster is getting cheaper and cheaper.

BTW, I'm done with the flame war here, I hope you all will pardon me as this dude does get my dander up a bit.  I'm moving on now.

Cheers!