Looks like master-P got me too who the hell can i trust here????????

[errorcoin22]

...
Good point, but if I was the hacker ... then I will move the coin as soon as possible.

I keep hearing that. Can you explain why?

Because then two people would have access to the coins. The thief would want to move the coins out ASAP so that the owner cannot reclaim them. Likewise the owner would want to move the coins out to another wallet ASAP so that the thief cannot steal them.

Still don't get it -- you mean we're assuming that "the hacker" isn't Master-P? Hasn't this been ruled out?

[1715256521]

1715256521

[1715256521]

1715256521

[1715256521]

1715256521

[TECSHARE]

Now this is serious question to whom we really trust to escrowing our funds?

Stick with OgNasty and Blazed and you'll be fine.

And until last week it was: stick to OgNasty, Blazed and master-p and you will be fine. The truth about escrow services are: it is being advertised as stable - until it is isn't.
And you really can't say for sure if some long known escrow one day change his mind and run away with your money because he feels 'tired' of the forum.

The difference is Master-P only had good reputation for about a year.  OGNasty and Blazed have been here much longer and have been trusted with much greater amounts. Also as far as OGNasty if his ID is not public, it would not be hard to find considering he is running other related businesses. This is what you get when you RESEARCH YOUR TRADING PARTNERS instead of trusting green and red numbers from a corrupt and broken trust system to tuck you in and tell you everything will be ok.

[achow101]

...
Good point, but if I was the hacker ... then I will move the coin as soon as possible.

I keep hearing that. Can you explain why?

Because then two people would have access to the coins. The thief would want to move the coins out ASAP so that the owner cannot reclaim them. Likewise the owner would want to move the coins out to another wallet ASAP so that the thief cannot steal them.

Still don't get it -- you mean we're assuming that "the hacker" isn't Master-P? Hasn't this been ruled out?

Yes. A hacker would mean that an outside party (not Master-P) hacked Master-P's computer and stole stuff. If you are saying that "the hacker" is Master-P, then that is just Master-P exit scamming, no hacking involved.

I don't think it has been entirely ruled out, just that it is unlikely he got hacked.

[errorcoin22]

[...]
The difference is Master-P only had good reputation for about a year.  OGNasty and Blazed have been here much longer and have been trusted with much greater amounts. [...]

So what you're telling me is OGNasty and Blazed are even more trustworthy than Master-P?
Is such a thing even possible?

[...]
I don't think it has been entirely ruled out, just that it is unlikely he got hacked.

I suppose. Wasn't he into crypto and stuff? You suppose OGNasty and Blazed are any better at securing their boxen? Odd number of h4xx0rings in a community so well versed in comp. security/obsessive about privacy.

[TECSHARE]

[...]
The difference is Master-P only had good reputation for about a year.  OGNasty and Blazed have been here much longer and have been trusted with much greater amounts. [...]

So what you're telling me is OGNasty and Blazed are even more trustworthy than Master-P?
Is such a thing even possible?

[...]
I don't think it has been entirely ruled out, just that it is unlikely he got hacked.

I suppose. Wasn't he into crypto and stuff? Are OGNasty and Blazed any better at securing their boxen?

Actually yes, I would trust Blazed and OGNasty any day over Master-P. Of course it is possible that any human being has a change of heart or circumstances that will lead them to scam, but not only are they both very technologically proficient, they have had chances to steal MUCH MUCH more. This is why I am an advocate of researching your trading partners and doing P2P trades without escrow. Taking smaller risks to test out your trading partner is what REAL LIVE TRUST NETWORKS are made of. Because you can't ever really tell if you can trust some one until you give them a chance to rip you off and they CHOOSE not to. A repeated pattern of them not abusing these circumstances is what builds real actual human trust.

Consider that risk a down payment on an actual useful trust network not controlled by politics and kickbacks but your own knowledge of the people you trade with. I try to avoid escrow if at all possible, and my reputation is usually sufficient to convince people it is ok to send payment to me first, however occasionally people refuse to trade without escrow (because people pound into their head that anyone refusing escrow is a scammer usually). When I am forced to use escrow I use OGNasty.

P.S. What is the plural form of Ox? Oxen. What is the plural form of box? Boxen? THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE IS THE SUN!

[errorcoin22]

>they have had chances to steal MUCH MUCH more.
Heard that about *every scam on bitcointalk.* Each and every one.
Second in popularity only to "Why would they [do ___] if they were scamming? It just don't make no sense!"

Not dissing either OG or Blazed, BTW, have no reason to.

P.S. didn't you say you were going to dump the dox today?

[TECSHARE]

>they have had chances to steal MUCH MUCH more.
Heard that about *every scam on bitcointalk.* Each and every one.
Second in popularity only to "Why would they [do ___] if they were scamming? It just don't make no sense!"

Not dissing either OG or Blazed, BTW, have no reason to.

P.S. didn't you say you were going to dump the dox today?

I think your problem is you just believe what people tell you. If you do your own research what everyone else is saying is irrelevant.

No, I set a deadline of January 1st. If he can sign a message as "The real Master-P" or starts returning funds, I will delay this deadline of course.

[errorcoin22]

^^You misunderstood me. I'm just amazed by how willingly people get scammed here. And how willingly they return for more. And how hostile they get when told "hey, you're about to get scammed again."

Take this yahoo[somenumber] character. Stiffed everyone on his spam campaigns (apparently, because the totally-not-his ponzi he was promoting got stiffed by Master-P), is asking for handouts in another thread, and only *one* person asked for the pittance due them.

[TECSHARE]

^^You misunderstood me. I'm just amazed by how willingly people get scammed here. And how willingly they return for more. And how hostile they get when told "hey, you're about to get scammed again."

Take this yahoo[somenumber] character. He stiffed everyone on his spam campaigns, is asking for handouts in another thread, and only *one* person asked for the pittance due them.

That is funny considering he was criticizing me and calling me "no better" than Master-P for asking for a bounty for his dox. Funny how the moral fingerwaggers are usually the first to not follow their own advice.

[yahoo62278]

How do you say that i stiffed anyone? I dont see how you think its my responsibility to pay the campaigns if the escrow took off with the funds? I opened that thread to try and get the ppl currently in those campaigns some of their pay. I have 0 money to my name as my funds were taken by the same guy. If i was the escrow for these campaigns then sure the responsibility would fall on me but all i do is manage here. You can take your attitude and shove it dude. Go troll someone else.

This is supposed to be a community, another reason the thread was started i was hoping to see a few ppl get together and help out in the situation. It only seems to me that alot of ppl wanna talk shit whom arent involved or are not even trying to help the situation.

Really aggravates me that you try to put the blame on me for any of this. Im a victim here as well as others but i dont see you jumping mexxers ass cause hes not gonna be paying out the campaign. Maybe you are mexxer idk. I dont really care at this point. Seems like youre adding me to the witch hunt and thats bullshit.

@TECSHARE when i made that comment i was pissed off at the whole damn world cause this whole mess has basically cost me 1k USD. the money i lost in the 1.5 btc sale and the money i was gonna make from managing this campaign. So i was a bit pissed off that ppl actually had his info but werent releasing it. I also wasnt aware that you had a plan in mind either. I just wanna see this situation resolved with as little of a loss for everyone as their can be

[TECSHARE]

I really know very little about what the campaign managers are doing, and frankly I don't care that much. In my opinion tho, the party who chose Master-P as escrow to pay out the campaign funds is liable for their loss, and stiffing the signature holders is wrong. Just as if Master-P was actually hacked, he would still be responsible for any coins lost under his care, the same is true for whoever is responsible for putting Master-P in charge of signature payout funds. Just because a 3rd party robbed you does not mean you are not still under contract with 2nd parties. I realize this is frustrating being victimized twice, but this was your personal responsibility to prevent these scenarios (assuming you chose Master-P as escrow).

[yahoo62278]

I really know very little about what the campaign managers are doing, and frankly I don't care that much. In my opinion tho, the party who chose Master-P as escrow to pay out the campaign funds is liable for their loss, and stiffing the signature holders is wrong. Just as if Master-P was actually hacked, he would still be responsible for any coins lost under his care, the same is true for whoever is responsible for putting Master-P in charge of signature payout funds. Just because a 3rd party robbed you does not mean you are not still under contract with 2nd parties. I realize this is frustrating being victimized twice, but this was your personal responsibility to prevent these scenarios (assuming you chose Master-P as escrow).

Managers arent paid enough to assume responsibility of paying a campaign if the escrows takes off. Thats ridiculous to even consider. No matter whom chooses the escrow the escrow recieves the money. I never see it so i dont see where your logic makes any sense.

[TECSHARE]

I really know very little about what the campaign managers are doing, and frankly I don't care that much. In my opinion tho, the party who chose Master-P as escrow to pay out the campaign funds is liable for their loss, and stiffing the signature holders is wrong. Just as if Master-P was actually hacked, he would still be responsible for any coins lost under his care, the same is true for whoever is responsible for putting Master-P in charge of signature payout funds. Just because a 3rd party robbed you does not mean you are not still under contract with 2nd parties. I realize this is frustrating being victimized twice, but this was your personal responsibility to prevent these scenarios (assuming you chose Master-P as escrow).

Managers arent paid enough to assume responsibility of paying a campaign if the escrows takes off. Thats ridiculous to even consider. No matter whom chooses the escrow the escrow recieves the money. I never see it so i dont see where your logic makes any sense.

Were you the one who transferred the funds to Master-P? Then it is your responsibility. If you aren't getting paid enough for your risk you need to ask for more or demand the advertisers cough up the missing funds. Otherwise these are just excuses. No one said it was fair. It is however your responsibility regardless of what Master-P did as you made agreements with 3rd parties.

[Quickseller]

I really know very little about what the campaign managers are doing, and frankly I don't care that much. In my opinion tho, the party who chose Master-P as escrow to pay out the campaign funds is liable for their loss, and stiffing the signature holders is wrong. Just as if Master-P was actually hacked, he would still be responsible for any coins lost under his care, the same is true for whoever is responsible for putting Master-P in charge of signature payout funds. Just because a 3rd party robbed you does not mean you are not still under contract with 2nd parties. I realize this is frustrating being victimized twice, but this was your personal responsibility to prevent these scenarios (assuming you chose Master-P as escrow).

Managers arent paid enough to assume responsibility of paying a campaign if the escrows takes off. Thats ridiculous to even consider. No matter whom chooses the escrow the escrow recieves the money. I never see it so i dont see where your logic makes any sense.

I would agree with you on this. It is the responsibility of the company that is receiving the advertising to ensure that signature campaign participants are paid as they are the ones receiving the benefits of such advertising. It is the escrow that is guaranteeing (and in many cases, making) the payments to signature campaign participants.

It does not matter who choose suggested the escrow, as at the end of the day, all parties to a transaction agreed to use a particular person as escrow.

[errorcoin22]

How do you say that i stiffed anyone? I dont see how you think its my responsibility to pay the campaigns if the escrow took off with the funds?

1. Were you told by the scumbags reputable establishments you represent that they refuse to honor their debts?
2. Did the participants entered into a contractual agreement with you, scumbags reputable establishments you represent, or Master-P?

I opened that thread to try and get the ppl currently in those campaigns some of their pay.

In a separate thread, you claimed losses of 6+ BTC.
3. Did the scumbags reputable establishments you represent authorize you to beg on this forum, on their behalf? And to claim their losses as yours?
4. In your begging thread, you ask people to display the sigs from the scumbags reputable establishments you represent for free. Did the scumbags reputable establishments you represent authorize this?

I have 0 money to my name as my funds were taken by the same guy.

Yeah, life's unfair like that. Please answer the questions enumerated above.
ty.

[madjules007]

I dunno why you guys are jumping on the campaign manager's back. He did everything by the book, and all that should have been expected of him. These guys just get paid a nominal fee to administer the campaign. The agreement, certainly in spirit, is between the advertising company and the participants. If the manager were handling funds irresponsibly, it is incumbent upon the advertising company to sack him and move forward with a more responsible manager. But that isn't what happened here.

Master-P either exit scammed or got hacked. Really not sure how that makes a campaign manager responsible for his advertiser's debts. When my company has a dispute with a vendor, we don't scapegoat the attorney that signed the agreement. We place blame with the vendor.

[errorcoin22]

[...] all parties to a transaction agreed to use a particular person as escrow.

No. Read the Coinbet sig thread. No mention of participants' pay depending on the escrow not running away. I expect to receive the wages promised me, unless the company employing me declares bankruptcy. Both the gambling site & the totally real ugaise cloud mining/web wallet/MLM operations claim to be doing just fine.

@madjules007: Begging for money is not, strictly, "by the book." Either OP or the scumbags reputable establishments he represents ripped off the spammerscampaign participants.

OP didn't incur any spam-related losses. He lost the coin he was selling (@+10% lol).
The scumbags reputable establishments he represents incur any losses.
The spammerscampaign participants did. And they ain't begging. Not even asking for their due

[Quickseller]

[...] all parties to a transaction agreed to use a particular person as escrow.

No. Read the Coinbet sig thread. No mention of participants' pay depending on the escrow not running away. I expect to receive the wages promised me, unless the company employing me declares bankruptcy. Both the gambling site & the totally real ugaise cloud mining/web wallet/MLM operations claim to be doing just fine.

In the case of Coinbet, it would be coinbet that is responsible for making the payments as they would be the one who received the benefit of the signature advertising. The campaign manager is merely an employee 

[errorcoin22]

[...] all parties to a transaction agreed to use a particular person as escrow.

No. Read the Coinbet sig thread. No mention of participants' pay depending on the escrow not running away. I expect to receive the wages promised me, unless the company employing me declares bankruptcy. Both the gambling site & the totally real ugaise cloud mining/web wallet/MLM operations claim to be doing just fine.

In the case of Coinbet, it would be coinbet that is responsible for making the payments as they would be the one who received the benefit of the signature advertising. The campaign manager is merely an employee  

Fine. Who is behind Coinbet, let's paint their trust red. (have't checked the wording in his other thing, the cloud mining/web wallet/MLM operation. Doing that now.
Edit: Done. Same shit. Who's behind Ore mining? Let's paint their trust red.

[achow101]

yahoo62278 have you tried contacting the companies and seeing if they would still send payments for the campaigns?