Is escrowing for yourself using a secret alt OK?

[Cxinbolen]

Good job, people. We got the "No" votes to 100.

[onemorexmr]

Good job, people. We got the "No" votes to 100.

as long as defaulttrust contains members who think escrowing for himself its ok its kinda meaningless :/

[erikalui]

It's not against the rules but it's definitely WRONG to do it no matter what's the reason behind it. If an escrow does it, he definitely is not trustworthy and nobody should trust him either.

[onemorexmr]

It's not against the rules but it's definitely WRONG to do it no matter what's the reason behind it. If an escrow does it, he definitely is not trustworthy and nobody should trust him either.

which rules?
dictionary says third party? do we need a special dictionary for bitcointalk to redefine words?

[gampher]

Escrow means a third party. And escrowing for himself doesn't make it a third party. This statement is enough to give you an answer.

[erikalui]

It's not against the rules but it's definitely WRONG to do it no matter what's the reason behind it. If an escrow does it, he definitely is not trustworthy and nobody should trust him either.

which rules?
dictionary says third party? do we need a special dictionary for bitcointalk to redefine words?

I'm talking about this forum rules. It can't earn any member a ban if they escrow for themselves.

[onemorexmr]

It's not against the rules but it's definitely WRONG to do it no matter what's the reason behind it. If an escrow does it, he definitely is not trustworthy and nobody should trust him either.

which rules?
dictionary says third party? do we need a special dictionary for bitcointalk to redefine words?

I'm talking about this forum rules. It can't earn any member a ban if they escrow for themselves.

forum doesnt even ban scammers...

but scammers shouldnt be on defaulttrust level 1
thats why i think everybody who thinks escrowing for himself is ok shouldnt be on defaulttrust.

[TheButterZone]

Doesn't even fit the definition of escrow.

If you don't trust someone enough to trade without an escrow, don't trust them with an escrow either, and don't send first.

[erikalui]

forum doesnt even ban scammers...

but scammers shouldnt be on defaulttrust level 1
thats why i think everybody who thinks escrowing for himself is ok shouldnt be on defaulttrust.

That's why I said it's WRONG and also unethical to do so. Escrows here are defining their own set of rules and what service needs to be used for the betterment of members and make them feel safe, the service is now looking shady itself. Hope other escrows learn from this and stop doing it.

Edit: I don't find a reason to have escrows on the DT list as they tend to leave a rating for those members who they have escrowed for.

[BitcoinBoss666]

I only want to say couple word about vod.
How you can talk about other guys? You abusing trust system, and u think u are god?
Quick dont scam nobody but this is what he is doing is not ok, but he is still better guy then VOD.
He should get ban... He give red trust without any reason fuck him .

[dooglus]

I only want to say couple word about vod.
How you can talk about other guys? You abusing trust system, and u think u are god?
Quick dont scam nobody but this is what he is doing is not ok, but he is still better guy then VOD.
He should get ban... He give red trust without any reason fuck him .

That looks like he negatively rated a bunch of 0-post alts which were doing nothing but abusing the trust system.

Why would you have a problem with that?

[BitcoinBoss666]

Becouse this is old accounts without any post or activity. Maybe someone create accout and forget about it? Why he should get red trust ?
I have problem with it, and it is abusing for me.

[EcuaMobi]

Becouse this is old accounts without any post or activity. Maybe someone create accout and forget about it? Why he should get red trust ?
I have problem with it, and it is abusing for me.

No, those are accounts that were created by the user symantec with the only purpose of leaving trust spam. Open the profile of a few of those accounts (1, 2, 3, ...) and check the received and sent feedback. Probably the only problem with his feedback on those accounts is it's not descriptive enough.
Anyway you shouldn't discuss this on this thread. If you have problems with him either PM him or if that fails open a thread on Meta (if you didn't already).

[xetsr]

Becouse this is old accounts without any post or activity. Maybe someone create accout and forget about it? Why he should get red trust ?
I have problem with it, and it is abusing for me.

Totally believable. Someone created multiple accounts, left negative feedback for multiple members and forgot about them. LOL.

Were those your alts / shills or are you just pissed you're also marked red?

[Vod]

Becouse this is old accounts without any post or activity. Maybe someone create accout and forget about it? Why he should get red trust ?
I have problem with it, and it is abusing for me.

Do you really believe someone made 20+ accounts all on the same day, left me negative feedback on each one, did nothing else with the accounts, then just forgot about them?

Is that what you want us to think?

If you really believe this, start a new thread in scam accusations and call me out!  I'm not above the community!

Nothing to do with this poll.   

[ABitNut]

Becouse this is old accounts without any post or activity. Maybe someone create accout and forget about it? Why he should get red trust ?
I have problem with it, and it is abusing for me.

Do you really believe someone made 20+ accounts all on the same day, left me negative feedback on each one, did nothing else with the accounts, then just forgot about them?

Is that what you want us to think?

If you really believe this, start a new thread in scam accusations and call me out!  I'm not above the community!

Nothing to do with this poll.   

Please add me to that thread. I got negative feedback from those as well.

PS. Thanks Vod for marking those. Saved me the trouble of doing it myself...

[Quickseller]

Of-course NO

I am sorry, but I am going to have to call you out on this one. Weren't you escrowing for a signature campaign that you had several alt accounts in?

@shorena - I will respond to your post in due time, however I am short on time currently and wish to put great effort into my response.

[Soros Shorts]

No. I would even go further and say that 2 different people who are closely related outside the forum should not escrow for one another. That is like having a judge and a prosecutor who hang out together after work everyday. It stinks.

Of course, all this is difficult to prove in the online world.

[smoothie]

Is it okay for me to posture using another account to "escrow" funds for a transaction I am doing with someone else.

Basically putting up an illusion of an actual escrow.

LOL pretty obvious answer is NO it isn't okay.

[21coin]

I'm not gonna go against QS, but this does seem unethical, and as the trust here is not moderated anyone is free to give his negative trust to anyone.
But coming to the point, because of QS being removed from default trust many scammer will be running free.As for the other members of default trust, I highly doubt they have seen how many people QS has negative repped for trying to scam. A solution to this would be going through QS's trust feedbacks and at least try to figure out who were rightly marked by QS for trying to scam.