Quickseller escrowing for himself

[Quickseller]

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"?

There are several differences.

First, in your situation in the event that Bob had made a mistake, the damage would be irreversible. Lives would be lost, and people cannot be "unkilled", once those on board the airplane are dead, that is the end of their lives, period. On the other hand, if the escrow makes a mistake (eg they send to the incorrect address, they release escrow to a party that he should not have released to and later additional information is discovered to have been available to the escrow that would reveal he should have released to the other party, ect), then the escrow will need to cover the losses out of his own pocket. The escrow making a mistake is something that can be fixed.

Secondly your example lacks the checks and balances of the other trading partner. The plane will takeoff only with the two signatures from Bob. When escrowing your own deal, you will need the authorization of the person you are dealing with to send funds to yourself. Granted there is the potential for a conflict of interest in this case, however it is my policy, (and although this clause was not included in the specific agreements in question, it is written in other templates, and such a policy would have been enforced) that if it is not abundantly clear which side to take in a dispute then a scam accusation should be opened so the community can help moderate the dispute, this is not unlike what happened here but with an actual escrow involved. A similar point is that it is very rare for there to be any kind of dispute when dealing with escrow. Both when discussing deals I have been a direct party to and deals that I have escrowed, there really have not been any disputes that have not been extremely clearcut from the very beginning. I understand that many people are saying that there is no neutral third party, however I am really not aware of any situations where, based on the evidence available that it was anything but clearcut as to which party was in the right.

Thirdly, in your example Alice wants to hire a second mechanic to check behind Bob. However in the situations that I was involved in, Alice would have gladly asked Bob to both check the first time and the second time, and would have paid a premium for doing so.

My fourth and what I believe to be my strongest point is a slightly changed scenario. Instead of Alice only owning a single airplane, she owns an airline, and there is another employee, Zach. Although there is no policy or rule against wearing disguises, and although there is no policy explicitly allowing this practice, Zach will, on multiple occasions wear a disguise and be seen by many others that work for the airline. This fact is even brought up multiple times during company meetings and no one is critical of the practice. Some may miss this point, but Bob sees that this is happening out in the open and has no reason to believe anyone would be critical of of this behavior. As a result, Bob does what is described in your post after seeing Zach doing the exact same thing without consequence.

With the above being said, I have my right to my own opinion just like you have your right to your opinion. You have the right to believe that escrowing for ones self is wrong just like I have the right to have an opinion that there is no issue with this.

With that being said, I absolutely would not escrow for myself in the future without giving the proper disclosure that this is a possibility. It is clear that some are out to get blood and will stop at nothing to get it, and will use this as a way to extract such blood.

If I were to find out that I was trading with someone who was using themselves as escrow then I would not be in any way upset, nor would I make any attempt to call them out on the issue.  

If someone were to ask my opinion about escrowing for ones self then I would tell them there is a great risk that some may go after blood if this is revealed, but that I do not have any personal issue with it, and that they should make a disclosure that it is possible the escrow is wearing more then one hat.


It really is not going to be difficult to hide the fact that an account is your alt, even from the administration (at least in theory). If the community is going to "outlaw" the practice of escrowing for your own trades then people are going to assume that the escrow is not the same person as the person you are dealing with, however if there are additional risks to this practice as you claim, then people will make no effort into protecting themselves from these risks.

I don't think these are good arguments but not suprised you've spun
something creative to justify yourself.

Briefly:

#1) No the damage wouldn't be irreversible if there was a contractual
dispute and the escrower/trader didn't change their mind about how
to handle it.  You're also using an "ends justify the means" philosophy
where its ok to be deceive people for your own convenience as long as
no one gets hurt.  Same thing as I said in the example.

#2) Non sensical.  The person holding the money controls the risk.

#3) No.  If Alice would have "gladly asked Bob to check both the first and second time", then there's no need to be a secret escrow.  

#4) You are justifying based on how critical others are of the practice.

Yet, the community clearly has spoken:



You can have your own opinion about it, but almost everyone here
agrees you're wrong...and I think what you've posted here just
shows you'll go to any length to create mental gymanistics to
rationalize that opinion.

 

3) Privacy. How quickly do you think someone like TheGambler would create and/or buy an account to respond to a [WTB] thread created by someone who had stopped him from being able to steal additional money from others multiple times? How many trolls have posted on Dogie's [WTS] threads about his VAT practices (that I have no reason to believe is illegal in anyway)? The identity of the person doing the maintenance of the airplane would be public in both cases so your scenario is not comparable.

4) There are no rules about how trades are conducted. To be critical of one person for a certain type of activity that echoes the business practices of another that are done out in the open is ridiculous. To do so is similar to retroactively changing the law and then charge them with a crime after doing something that was previously not against the law.

2) The escrow could just as well run away with the money in either scenario. There is no need to scam someone by having a dispute in a trade if they are going to scam.

1) The potential damage is significantly different from the two scenarios. No one is going to die or come close to it if a few hundred or a few thousand dollars is stolen from them. I am not saying that scamming is okay because it is not, but the potential for damage is different. If there is evidence that the escrow made a bad decision but does not cover the losses then he is a scammer. Again the escrow might as well run away with the money.

Forum polls are worthless. That thread only has most likely ~7-10 people posting the same opinion from ~50 accounts.

Do you seriously think the reaction would be the same if someone who had not put so much effort into preventing theft by users on the forum? There was even someone who had hacked an account and used that account to be critical of me on the other thread (instead of trying to scam someone with the stolen account).

[1713572402]

1713572402

[1713572402]

1713572402

[1713572402]

1713572402

[Quickseller]

I will have a full dox of Quickseller posted by Friday if not earlier and will continue to update it and bust his alts.

But why you want to dox him/her. He/she did not scammed anyone. So no need to doxing.

QS threatens Vod with sue menaces and acuses him of commiting crimes, yet has his/her identity hidden so he can do and speak anything without fear of retaliation.

I don't think a DOX would be unfair

Saying something and doing different thing. When QS will try to sue VOD his/her identity will reveal automatically.

I still don't support QS Dox.

My wish is that Vod stop libeling my reputation. His statements are factually inaccurate.

[tspacepilot]

Forum polls are worthless. That thread only has most likely ~7-10 people posting the same opinion from ~50 accounts.

Oh, I think I know what you mean, I saw this poll where it seems that the same person posted at least 9 of the 14 posts in the thread. Did you end up voting in that one, QS/panthers52?

[Quickseller]

Forum polls are worthless. That thread only has most likely ~7-10 people posting the same opinion from ~50 accounts.

Oh, I think I know what you mean, I saw this poll where it seems that the same person posted at least 9 of the 14 posts in the thread. Did you end up voting in that one, QS/panthers52?

Yup, from one account. In case you didn't notice, I was advocating for the identities of everyone who voted and how to be revealed.

The same person was not trying to make it appear that multiple people had the opinion of one person...

[tspacepilot]

Yup, from one account. In case you didn't notice, I was advocating for the identities of everyone who voted and how to be revealed.

The same person was not trying to make it appear that multiple people had the opinion of one person...

I guess we can agree that I'm really stupid because I don't understand at all.  When you were talking to yourself in a thread posting back and forth under at least two accounts, that means you were not trying to make it appear that multiple people had the same opinion?

I know I must be missing something but it seems like the crux of this issue you are having is about how you've been using many accounts to make it appear that you are more people than you are.  Or wait, maybe you ARE many people?  Is Quickseller a collective?

[Quickseller]

Yup, from one account. In case you didn't notice, I was advocating for the identities of everyone who voted and how to be revealed.

The same person was not trying to make it appear that multiple people had the opinion of one person...

I guess we can agree that I'm really stupid because I don't understand at all.  When you were talking to yourself in a thread posting back and forth under at least two accounts, that means you were not trying to make it appear that multiple people had the same opinion?

I know I must be missing something but it seems like the crux of this issue you are having is about how you've been using many accounts to make it appear that you are more people than you are.  Or wait, maybe you ARE many people?  Is Quickseller a collective?

What are you talking about? I was posting under Panthers52 account and later when it was revealed that QS=p52, I posted there, responding to someone else under my QS account.

I'm not really sure how that is suppose to be me talking to myself as it should have been fairly clear that one person was posting considering the handle was the same.

[Shadow_Runner]

I will have a full dox of Quickseller posted by Friday if not earlier and will continue to update it and bust his alts.

But why you want to dox him/her. He/she did not scammed anyone. So no need to doxing.

QS threatens Vod with sue menaces and acuses him of commiting crimes, yet has his/her identity hidden so he can do and speak anything without fear of retaliation.

I don't think a DOX would be unfair

Saying something and doing different thing. When QS will try to sue VOD his/her identity will reveal automatically.

I still don't support QS Dox.

Gotta agree here...i don't see why a small matter such as this has to be escalated to such proportions ...

Because I hate kids like Quickseller and his reaction will be worth it

[jonald_fyookball]

I will have a full dox of Quickseller posted by Friday if not earlier and will continue to update it and bust his alts.

But why you want to dox him/her. He/she did not scammed anyone. So no need to doxing.

QS threatens Vod with sue menaces and acuses him of commiting crimes, yet has his/her identity hidden so he can do and speak anything without fear of retaliation.

I don't think a DOX would be unfair

Saying something and doing different thing. When QS will try to sue VOD his/her identity will reveal automatically.

I still don't support QS Dox.

Dox wouldn't be good despite qs poor judgement and action s.

[BiPolarBob]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

[EcuaMobi]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

I couldn't agree more, this is nonsense. I hope Shadow_Runner will come to his senses but it seems hate is blinding him, as it has several other members here already.

[Fortify]

Not once has QuickSeller admitted he was wrong, that's all it takes for you to regain some respect here. Instead of that he keeps up this delusional dream world where everyone else is wrong - it's psychotic. The fact you're still making legal threats is a joke as well. Maybe if the staff here actually did something about duplicate accounts then this problem wouldn't exist.

[Shadow_Runner]

I'm not blinded, this is purely out of revenge towards Quickseller. He treated me the same way based off nothing but assumptions. I have facts on him. Too much time wasted and money lost trying to restore this account on here. Quickseller has to waste some time dealing with issues too I'm thinking. Luckily this is side work.. Otherwise you'd really be dealing with problems. 

[Quickseller]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

I couldn't agree more, this is nonsense. I hope Shadow_Runner will come to his senses but it seems hate is blinding him, as it has several other members here already.

Shadow_Runner is bluffing. He saw that TF sent me 20BTC and is trying to extort me. The only problem is that he is asking/asked for the incorrect amount.

Vod on the other hand, I am much more worried about...

[Shadow_Runner]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

I couldn't agree more, this is nonsense. I hope Shadow_Runner will come to his senses but it seems hate is blinding him, as it has several other members here already.

Shadow_Runner is bluffing. He saw that TF sent me 20BTC and is trying to extort me. The only problem is that he is asking/asked for the incorrect amount.

Vod on the other hand, I am much more worried about...

Oh, really? So you didn't sign up for a P.O box in Charlotte North Carolina using your real ID? You don't have 2 other accounts with decent ratings that haven't been publicly busted yet? You don't ship packages from there with sloppy, childish handwriting to try and disguise your address? You are pathetic.

[Shadow_Runner]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

I couldn't agree more, this is nonsense. I hope Shadow_Runner will come to his senses but it seems hate is blinding him, as it has several other members here already.

Shadow_Runner is bluffing. He saw that TF sent me 20BTC and is trying to extort me. The only problem is that he is asking/asked for the incorrect amount.

Vod on the other hand, I am much more worried about...

Now ask me how I got that info. I pretended I was filing a lawsuit against you. You are resourceful. Go take a look at what info I got from that. I'm not and never have tried to extort you. Why don't you copy and paste that joke where I said I'll only post it on the clearweb and not the deepweb for that 20 bitcoins. You were getting doxxed either way, I'd have just loved to scam you too.

[ajareselde]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

Agreed. QS has learned his lession, and i believe the good he has done catching scammers and alike outweighs the incident with the escrow.
And BS with the court on the other side needs to stop aswell, you're looking like a bunch of kids tossing blames, aint that funny anymore.

[Quickseller]

Not once has QuickSeller admitted he was wrong, that's all it takes for you to regain some respect here.

is that really all you want to hear? (I had previously said I was wrong on another thread).

Okay, I was wrong in how I handled this situation. I do understand how some people may be upset (although I do believe that many people commenting on the subject are upset about my abilities to out them as scammers). I was merely echoing the business practices of another more respected and more trusted person then me. Business practices that were done in the open, that many were aware of and do not have a problem with (even after it being made very public in this very thread).

[onemorexmr]

Don't dox QuickSeller. The forum hath decided with negative trust and loss of DT status. Anything more is just out of spite/anger and harms this forum more than helping it.

agreed

[Shadow_Runner]

Not once has QuickSeller admitted he was wrong, that's all it takes for you to regain some respect here.

is that really all you want to hear? (I had previously said I was wrong on another thread).

Okay, I was wrong in how I handled this situation. I do understand how some people may be upset (although I do believe that many people commenting on the subject are upset about my abilities to out them as scammers). I was merely echoing the business practices of another more respected and more trusted person then me. Business practices that were done in the open, that many were aware of and do not have a problem with (even after it being made very public in this very thread).

I said I wanted you to leave the forum.

[Vod]

Forum polls are worthless. That thread only has most likely ~7-10 people posting the same opinion from ~50 accounts.

Holy shit you are an idiot.

The entire community says what you are doing is wrong, and you claim it's worthless?

My wish is that Vod stop libeling my reputation. His statements are factually inaccurate.

I've never once libeled your useless reputation.

You are a scammer, a liar and a thief, as well as an idiot and a fool.

You don't like it?  You can leave the community, put up with it, or sue me.  I'm going to continue to warn everyone about you.

Idiot.