Quickseller escrowing for himself

[Quickseller]

Escrowing your own trade is NOT ESCROW it just becomes a straight 1:1 transaction.

Right. And there is no reason why someone would not trust you to engage in a 1:1 transaction if they would trust you to act as escrow.

Why cant you grasp that simple concept quickseller, why should someone pay an "Escrow" fee for zero protection and zero impartiality!

A economically rational person would be willing to pay at least an amount more that is equal to the escrow fee in a 1:1 trade because this cost is no longer associated with the trade. Just because neither party trusts eachother sufficiently to send money/goods first does not change the value of which either party is willing to pay for such goods/services.

[1714718483]

1714718483

[1714718483]

1714718483

[1714718483]

1714718483

[markj113]

Escrowing your own trade is NOT ESCROW it just becomes a straight 1:1 transaction.

Right. And there is no reason why someone would not trust you to engage in a 1:1 transaction if they would trust you to act as escrow.

Why cant you grasp that simple concept quickseller, why should someone pay an "Escrow" fee for zero protection and zero impartiality!

A economically rational person would be willing to pay at least an amount more that is equal to the escrow fee in a 1:1 trade because this cost is no longer associated with the trade. Just because neither party trusts eachother sufficiently to send money/goods first does not change the value of which either party is willing to pay for such goods/services.

But there person you traded with did not trust you or wish to trade with you on a 1:1 basis hence their request for the a 3rd party Escrow.

They were trying to implement a safety measure should the trade go wrong so by you faking a 3rd party Escrow you circumvented the buyers wishes.

[Quickseller]

Escrowing your own trade is NOT ESCROW it just becomes a straight 1:1 transaction.

Right. And there is no reason why someone would not trust you to engage in a 1:1 transaction if they would trust you to act as escrow.

Why cant you grasp that simple concept quickseller, why should someone pay an "Escrow" fee for zero protection and zero impartiality!

A economically rational person would be willing to pay at least an amount more that is equal to the escrow fee in a 1:1 trade because this cost is no longer associated with the trade. Just because neither party trusts eachother sufficiently to send money/goods first does not change the value of which either party is willing to pay for such goods/services.

But there person you traded with did not wish to trade with you on a 1:1 basis hence their request for the a 3rd party Escrow.

They were trying to implement a safety measure should the trade go wrong so by you faking a 3rd party Escrow you circumvented the buyers wishes.

I disagree. If someone were to trust markj113 to escrow a deal for a $100 widget, then what logical reason would the same person not trust markj113 to ship the exact same $100 widget after sending the same $100 to markj113? The risk of markj113 running away with the coins is exactly the same.

[JosIzem]

Ok now that QS and Panthers are same person and I think QS has admitted it , then just answer me something.

Pathers and you both buy coins from blazedout419 , now why u buy from different accounts , to buy trust, isn't it ?

panthers

http://prntscr.com/8frtvw

QS

http://prntscr.com/8fru6h

Now if you were really making the trades because you were buying coins and not buying trust then why you not did the trades with a single account ?

[Vod]

Ok now that QS and Panthers are same person and I think QS has admitted it , then just answer me something.

Pathers and you both buy coins from blazedout419 , now why u buy from different accounts , to buy trust, isn't it ?

panthers

http://prntscr.com/8frtvw

QS

http://prntscr.com/8fru6h

Now if you were really making the trades because you were buying coins and not buying trust then why you not did the trades with a single account ?

The only reason for QS to buy coins from two different accounts is to build trust, yes.

[james.lent]

[Mitchell]

I am still in the process of my investigating but it seems quickseller and BiPolarBob are the same. I have started the accusation but I will build some evidence before making a big show of it

I know for a fact they are not the same people...

Watch out! Before you know it, you are a paid shill. Just like LaudaM and me.

[Vod]

Has Quickseller provided a list of those he has escrow scammed?  I haven't seen one.

He claims he will refund anyone he scammed if they ask for a refund.   How are they supposed to know?

[superpanos2]

Has Quickseller provided a list of those he has escrow scammed?  I haven't seen one.

He claims he will refund anyone he scammed if they ask for a refund.   How are they supposed to know?

Please state where did he say that?
We should quote this for reference.
Even if he said something like that, we will not be able to know how many people have been scammed.
Let's say I used his escrow service.
How should I know if my customer was actually him? There might be tens of QS alts out there, nobody knows.

[Bardman]

Has Quickseller provided a list of those he has escrow scammed?  I haven't seen one.

He claims he will refund anyone he scammed if they ask for a refund.   How are they supposed to know?

Please state where did he say that?
We should quote this for reference.
Even if he said something like that, we will not be able to know how many people have been scammed.
Let's say I used his escrow service.
How should I know if my customer was actually him? There might be tens of QS alts out there, nobody knows.

But HE knows so if he really wanted to do it, he would, at this point i don´t trust a word QS says and no one should.

[shorena]

Escrowing your own trade is NOT ESCROW it just becomes a straight 1:1 transaction.

Right. And there is no reason why someone would not trust you to engage in a 1:1 transaction if they would trust you to act as escrow.

Why cant you grasp that simple concept quickseller, why should someone pay an "Escrow" fee for zero protection and zero impartiality!

A economically rational person would be willing to pay at least an amount more that is equal to the escrow fee in a 1:1 trade because this cost is no longer associated with the trade. Just because neither party trusts eachother sufficiently to send money/goods first does not change the value of which either party is willing to pay for such goods/services.

But there person you traded with did not wish to trade with you on a 1:1 basis hence their request for the a 3rd party Escrow.

They were trying to implement a safety measure should the trade go wrong so by you faking a 3rd party Escrow you circumvented the buyers wishes.

I disagree. If someone were to trust markj113 to escrow a deal for a $100 widget, then what logical reason would the same person not trust markj113 to ship the exact same $100 widget after sending the same $100 to markj113? The risk of markj113 running away with the coins is exactly the same.

I understand your argument, but I dont think its valid. Another example. Lets say I wanted to buy a coin from Mitchell for 1 BTC. Lets fruther assume I am nervous about the trade or do not trust them enough to go first. The same is true the other way around. We both argee on an escrow agent. I am willing to pay a 1% fee, but that does equal me willing to pay 1.01 BTC for the coin. I am willing to pay the fee for someone that is neutral and I can trust to look at things without bias should something go wrong. Yes, I have to trust the escrow service with at least 1 BTC. Yes, I am at risk towards the escrow. On the other hand a single bad deal can easily ruin their business. Remember redsn0w? They didnt even scam and are out of business.

Just because I would go frist in a 1 BTC deal with you, does not mean I would pay you 0.01 BTC for a biased opinion. If you are the other party and the escrow you can not be without bias. Same as BadBear can not moderate reports regarding their own posts without bias. It does not matter how good a moderator BadBear is or how honest an escrow agent you are. If you could judge an issue regarding yourself without bias you would suffer from a dissociative identity disorder. Even in that case it would still be a gamble for me which indetity is active when judging my case.

#

[Wendigo]

The amount of psychopaths in the bitcoin community is alarming 

[Vod]

The amount of psychopaths in the bitcoin community is alarming 

Greed does that to a LOT of people.   

[siameze]

I am still in the process of my investigating but it seems quickseller and BiPolarBob are the same. I have started the accusation but I will build some evidence before making a big show of it

I know for a fact they are not the same people...

Watch out! Before you know it, you are a paid shill. Just like LaudaM and me.

Wish I had known that before I asked you to escrow that windmill deal I set up.

[zeraTunerse]

haahaa..sorry For Going A bit Off Topic , I am Happy to see Vod Back with Positive Trust !
I am also Following this thread from 2 hours and Find that is is really bad to deceive people on the name of Escrow.

[Mark Frappeles]

And now Quickseller has the "Warning: Trade with extreme caution!" tag in his profile.

That's was a good lesson about how quickly dig an abyss and straight jump into it. From DT and 100+ dark green reputation to red trust in few days

[Blazed]

This whole thing is sort of sad really. At the end of the day, I would still trade with QS and would even have no issues sending first. He did a good job busting scams etc... I just do not get why he did the self escrow stuff  . While the self escrow thing was shady - not really sure it was a "scam" - more in the grey area.

[redsn0w]

This whole thing is sort of sad really. At the end of the day, I would still trade with QS and would even have no issues sending first. He did a good job busting scams etc... I just do not get why he did the self escrow stuff  . While the self escrow thing was shady - not really sure it was a "scam" - more in the grey area.

What about the 'fake' 3 days ban from the forum? Only an opinion and obviously you are free to don't reply to my question.

[jonald_fyookball]

@TBZ - I am sorry if my actions are something that you do not approve of. I repeat this same statement to anyone else who does not approve of my actions. I am not going to repeat my arguments as to why I believe that escrowing for yourself is okay because I have echo'ed them many times across multiple threads and for the most part they have mostly been ignored. There have also been no logical and/or factual arguments that counter any of my arguments, but rather nothing but trolls, scammers and shit posters who in no way address my arguments.

At the end of the day, what I did was a result of my witnessing of similar activity by one of the most, if not the most trusted and respected member of the community doing what was essentially the exact same thing out in the open and without consequence. I had posted in the thread where this was happening out in the open multiple times, so it is difficult to say that I was unaware of the situation.

If there are no rules regarding how people can and cannot conduct their own business, then how can you argue that someone who is conducting business in similar ways to one of the most trusted people in the community in the open months after he had done so is in the wrong?

Escrowing for yourself isn't okay because by definition an escrow is a neutral third party. 
It's been logically explained to you by numerous people.  TC isn't right for doing it either
but he's not going on trying to justify it. 

The more you argue it, the more I'm tempted to leave negative feedback.  I haven't done so thus
far because I thought the offense was minor and DT removal was good enough, but your attitude
makes me not trust your judgement.

Okay, if you and/or the community thinks that self escrowing is not okay, then why was there no outcry when it happened months ago? New users should know that asking for a loan without collateral is not okay because a) there is a sticky warning advising not to request such loans and b) because it happens often and the public result is that the new users receive negative ratings. On the other hand, escrowing for ones self happens out in the open with zero public outcry (there is more then one person engaging in this practice, however I am not going to call anyone out on this for obvious reasons).

Furthermore, if the appropriate disclosures are made (as I have since done), then whose business is it to say that others are not able to engage in a consensual transaction, that in reality, is going to overwhelmingly result in all parties involved saying they are happy with the transaction. This is exactly what a free market is, the ability for market participants to be able to make informed decisions as to how and what they wish to trade.

It's not consensual when there is deception involved.  no one cares when self escrowing is disclosed, but they do when it's not, which is what you've been doing.  

Pretty simple, dude.

Since I don't think you are stupid, I can only conclude you're unable to stop yourself from trying to rationalize your behavior and you're unwilling to just admit you're not right.

Let me give you an analogy and you can try to explain how your situation is any different.

Alice owns a small private airplane and hires Bob, an airplane engine mechanic to perform maintenance.
Afterward, Alice decides it would be prudent to have a second mechanic just double check the engine.  She hired Charlie, but it's really Bob who has a disguise and a fake mustache.  

Alice flies her plane, it works fine, no one gets hurt.  Bob points to this fact to rationalize his behavior.  
But his friend David is giving him flak for the deception, so Bob decides not to cash the second check made to Charlie.  Now he really feels good because no one got hurt and he never double charged Alice.

But what he's missing is that he deceived Alice, deprived her of the benefit of lower risk, and justified it all by pointing that he had done the job correctly.  Using insanely twisted logic, he says: "well if I didn't know what I was doing, the plane would have gone down, but that would have happened the same if she didn't hire a second mechanic to double check, or if I did the checking myself."

so, how is what you did any different than "Bob"?

[Blazed]

This whole thing is sort of sad really. At the end of the day, I would still trade with QS and would even have no issues sending first. He did a good job busting scams etc... I just do not get why he did the self escrow stuff  . While the self escrow thing was shady - not really sure it was a "scam" - more in the grey area.

What about the 'fake' 3 days ban from the forum? Only an opinion and obviously you are free to don't reply to my question.

I do not get the fake ban, but did it really affect anything? Maybe he thought a couple day break would clear his thoughts, and slow down the pitchforks? I think the only thing he did bad was the self-escrow thing.