Is escrowing for yourself using a secret alt OK?

[rebuilder]

So basically, Quickseller, what you're saying is, you engaged in trades where you required escrow to be used, and did not explicitly state the escrow agent used was you, yourself?

[TheButterZone]

WTF?

I'm going to need a PGP-clearsigned YES or NO answer, from Quickseller, to the following question:
Did you, Quickseller, engage in 1 or more trades where any party other than you was led to believe that there were 3 parties with 3 different DNA profiles involved in the trade (1-buyer, 2-seller 3-escrow agent), but in reality there were only 2?

YES or NO?

Did I lead anyone to believe that a trade I was acting as escrow[1] for had 3 distinct DNA profiles[2]? No. Any trade that I acted as a middle man (or as some like to say "escrow"), no explicit, nor implicit statement was made by myself saying that I was not a party to the trade. Any agreement that I had sent out said something along the lines that party (b) should send a certain amount of money to a particular BTC address, once party (s) saw that such an amount was sent to that address they should send a certain amount of money and/or goods and/or services to party (b), and once party (b) is in receipt of the above mentioned currency and/or goods and/or services they should authorize the release of the funds being held to party (s) who would then receive a certain amount of BTC to the address of their choice; and in the event of a dispute I would attempt to mediate such dispute, and if it would not be abundantly clear as to what a fair resolution would be then a scam accusation would be opened to consult the overall community. Nowhere was the words "3rd" (except for potentially the date or similar), or "neutral" were used.

[1]According to the link you provided one definition of "escrow" is:

[MASS NOUN] The state of being kept in custody or trust until a specified condition has been fulfilled:

Funds were kept in my custody of a specific BTC address until at least when specified conditions were fufilled

You failed on multiple levels (moral, ethical, legal, common sense, etc.), not the least of which was answering my binary question with a binary answer.

"or as some like to say "escrow""
You yourself use the term escrow in your Personal Text:
 "Safe and professional escrow goo.gl/ZI2m0Q"

But if we're going to use your second term "middle man", regardless of whether restitution was made, fraud occurred if 1 out of 2 exclusive parties pretended to be a middleman.

A person who arranges business or political deals between other people.

You are not simultaneously yourself and an other person.

The protective care or guardianship of someone or something: the property was placed in the custody of a trustee

Law An individual person or member of a board given control or powers of administration of property in trust with a legal obligation to administer it solely for the purposes specified: pension fund trustees

You are not simultaneously yourself and an individual person other than yourself.

[2]I have no idea what the DNA profiles were of any of the people I traded with, nor any of the people that I was acting as a middle man/escrow for. As I never requested, nor received their DNA profiles, and although unlikely, it is possible that a trade I engaged in only involved one DNA profile (I have no reason to believe this to be the case however).

The context you were replying to in the above quote included YOU in the 3 distinct DNA profiles of a 3 party trade. So the only possible way for "a trade {you} engaged in only involved one DNA profile" is that you either dealt with your multiple personalities (in the psychological sense, not the alt username sense), or you were dealing with AIs (that had no human involvement other than the initial coding which had nothing to with trading, prior to the AI's self-evolution into being able to trade), or your multiple personality & AI. Oh, and it's also "possible" those who have an identical DNA profile as you.

STOP DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE.

[Quickseller]

So has QS actually scammed anyone?

This should be pretty clear based on my trust...is it not?

[botany]

They can also claim that a day is 25 hours long. That doesn't make it true though.

If someone thinks a widget is worth $110, and offers $100 for it and is willing to pay $101 with the escrow few or offer $100 with him doing a direct trade then there is no reason why he would decline a counter offer of $101 from the party he is willing to send first to.

At worse it would be a negotiation tactic.   

If in my opinion, $100 (or something below that) is the best price that the seller can get elsewhere, I would decline the counter-offer of $101.

Like I said, this would, at worse work out to be a negotiation tactic.

What if the seller were to say that they would accept a $101 offer but they would pay the escrow fee? The buyer wouldn't  be paying the escrow fee in that case, but the buyer would still be paying the higher price.

Exactly! The buyer would be paying a higher price because he didn't know that the seller and the escrow are the same person.

[Quickseller]

They can also claim that a day is 25 hours long. That doesn't make it true though.

If someone thinks a widget is worth $110, and offers $100 for it and is willing to pay $101 with the escrow few or offer $100 with him doing a direct trade then there is no reason why he would decline a counter offer of $101 from the party he is willing to send first to.

At worse it would be a negotiation tactic.   

If in my opinion, $100 (or something below that) is the best price that the seller can get elsewhere, I would decline the counter-offer of $101.

Like I said, this would, at worse work out to be a negotiation tactic.

What if the seller were to say that they would accept a $101 offer but they would pay the escrow fee? The buyer wouldn't  be paying the escrow fee in that case, but the buyer would still be paying the higher price.

Exactly! The buyer would be paying a higher price because he didn't know that the seller and the escrow are the same person.

But is still a price he is willing to pay.
uy
At the end of the day, whose pocket the escrow fee goes into really does not make any difference to the buyer (in this example). All that really matters is that the buyer is, in one way or another going to have to pay it. Even though you say it is not the case, it is really true regardless if escrow is used or not.

[Vod]

So has QS actually scammed anyone?

This should be pretty clear based on my trust...is it not?

Yes I think so. Dont know why others are bashing you so hard.

Because he scammed people and is a proven liar.  Isn't that enough for you?

You want someone who lies to hold onto your money?

[Quickseller]

So has QS actually scammed anyone?

This should be pretty clear based on my trust...is it not?

Yes I think so. Dont know why others are bashing you so hard.

Because he scammed people and is a proven liar.  Isn't that enough for you?

You want someone who lies to hold onto your money?

What exactly did I lie about? Please quote the exact statement that I said that was a lie, and provide the proof that it was a lie.

Additionally you specifically said that I scammed someone, so please advise who exactly I stole money from, what amount of money I stole, and evidence of this theft.

If you feel that I have scammed someone, then I would suggest that you file a proper report -> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=260073.0

Also please be advised that your statement is libel and as a result will potentially expose your to a lawsuit for libel

[Vod]

What exactly did I lie about? Please quote the exact statement that I said that was a lie, and provide the proof that it was a lie.

Quickseller on his profile  -
"I've been banned for 3 days"

You weren't banned.  Hence the lie.  Unless Badbear was lying when he said you were not banned?

Now shut up with all the dramatics.  You are a proven liar.  

[Quickseller]

What exactly did I lie about? Please quote the exact statement that I said that was a lie, and provide the proof that it was a lie.

"I've been banned for 3 days"

Please point to the post where I made that exact statement.

[Vod]

What exactly did I lie about? Please quote the exact statement that I said that was a lie, and provide the proof that it was a lie.

"I've been banned for 3 days"

Please point to the post where I made that exact statement.

How?  You removed it from your profile.

[[BTC]onFIRE]

Quickseller:

It seems you abused the trust system to a big point where half the forum looked down upon you. You use trust to make yourself make feel better, rather than using it for what it is.

What you did was wrong, and you're being childish and not admitting anything. Maybe if you made a thread explaining the situation and apologizing, people would feel sympathy and understand. Instead you're choosing the wrong path...

[Quickseller]

What exactly did I lie about? Please quote the exact statement that I said that was a lie, and provide the proof that it was a lie.

"I've been banned for 3 days"

Please point to the post where I made that exact statement.

How?  You removed it from your profile.

Did my profile say that I was banned for three days? To be clear, is that what you were claiming that I said?

Also lying about being banned is not stealing from anyone, so your statement would still qualify as libel.

[Vod]

The exact words Quickseller used were

"Forced 3 day break from the forum Be back Saturday".

Since he didn't have a forced 3 day ban, that makes Quickseller a proven liar.

"https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12331922#msg12331922"

[[BTC]onFIRE]

The exact words Quickseller used were

"Forced 3 day break from the forum Be back Saturday".

Since he didn't have a forced 3 day ban, that makes Quickseller a proven liar.

"https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12331922#msg12331922"

Good job Vod, glad to have you back on the forums

[Quickseller]

The exact words Quickseller used were

"Forced 3 day break from the forum Be back Saturday".

Since he didn't have a forced 3 day ban, that makes Quickseller a proven liar.

"https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12331922#msg12331922"

Is the word "ban" anywhere in that statement? Would there be any other reasons why one might force themselves from taking a break from the forum?

Assuming that you could somehow conclude that the above statement is a lie, you still have the issue of proving that I stole money from someone which is what is causing you to be liable for libel.

[[BTC]onFIRE]

The exact words Quickseller used were

"Forced 3 day break from the forum Be back Saturday".

Since he didn't have a forced 3 day ban, that makes Quickseller a proven liar.

"https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12331922#msg12331922"

Is the word "ban" anywhere in that statement? Would there be any other reasons why one might force themselves from taking a break from the forum?

Assuming that you could somehow conclude that the above statement is a lie, you still have the issue of proving that I stole money from someone which is what is causing you to be liable for libel.

Why are you still trying to talk your way out? You didn't read my post? -_-

[Vod]

Why are you still trying to talk your way out? You didn't read my post? -_-

I honestly don't think Quickseller views his lying and escrow scamming as wrong.  It's very possible he grew up in a household that encouraged such behavior.  

[[BTC]onFIRE]

Why are you still trying to talk your way out? You didn't read my post? -_-

I honestly don't think Quickseller views lying and escrow scamming as wrong.  It's very possible he grew up in a household that encouraged such behavior. 

I can tell. His perceptions are completely incorrect. How many stories have you heard of Quickseller adding trust for a very bad/stupid reason? Too many.

[Quickseller]

The exact words Quickseller used were

"Forced 3 day break from the forum Be back Saturday".

Since he didn't have a forced 3 day ban, that makes Quickseller a proven liar.

"https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1171059.msg12331922#msg12331922"

Is the word "ban" anywhere in that statement? Would there be any other reasons why one might force themselves from taking a break from the forum?

Assuming that you could somehow conclude that the above statement is a lie, you still have the issue of proving that I stole money from someone which is what is causing you to be liable for libel.

Why are you still trying to talk your way out? You didn't read my post? -_-

I have no interest in reading posts that are overwhelmingly obvious being made to build up your account and later sell. If you wanted to post from your main account (not that I don't know what it is), and not one that was purchased sometime before mid May of this year, then I would consider reading your posts

[Thoughtful]

Why are you still trying to talk your way out? You didn't read my post? -_-

I honestly don't think Quickseller views lying and escrow scamming as wrong.  It's very possible he grew up in a household that encouraged such behavior. 

I can tell. His perceptions are completely incorrect. How many stories have you heard of Quickseller adding trust for a very bad/stupid reason? Too many.

LMFAO +1 +1 +1 +1 ^^^^^^^^^

so fuckin true! fuck you quickseller you're an idiot!