Why P2P Trading is Superior at Building Real Trust Networks

[TECSHARE]

Taken from the master-p scam accusation thread as to not go off topic.

Or, you know, actually know your trading partners well enough to know when something is not right...

Unbelievable how quickly people forget that Bitcoin was designed to enable PERSON TO PERSON transactions. Then everyone demands it be like every other system with mommy and daddy telling you things will be ok, dictating to everyone what they can and can't do. Then we are back where we started. Take some personal responsibility.

This incident with Master-P never would have happened if you had not demanded someone else take responsibility for your personal liabilities. When you do this you are basically saying that you have no faith in your own ability to make sound judgements and do research, and or you are too lazy. Then you wag your finger at everyone else when things don't work out. You people need to look in the mirror.

So you trade only with persons you know IRL since at least 2 years?

Person to person transactions, as you say, doesn't change the fact that you can be scammed, in any way. If I want to buy something, I have no guarantee whatsoever that it will be sent unless I know really well the seller and trust him. But to trust him, I need to have made at least a few deals with him.

Trust is built, built on what? On successfull exchanges. And I don't see the link between "your own ability to make sound judgements" and business trust. You're saying we should make researches on everyone we trade with? Fair enough, and how do you do when it's a first trade for someone? Imagine someone wanting to sell a 700$ worth miner, but he's not a legendary trusted member and never made a trade here, he's still a newbie. So how do you do your "own judgement" TECSHARE here? Or you tell him "nah bro, can't deal with you, wait for 2 or 3 years and when I'll know you better then maybe.

Not saying escrow is perfect, but you can't say it's just because "people are too lazy to do there own research".

Where exactly did I say P2P transactions means you can't be scammed, or that I know any of these people in real life? There are no guarantees with anything in life, especially with Bitcoin, and the exact problem is people are searching for guarantees that can't exist. This is just pushing off your personal liability and responsibility to some one else so you can act like an incompetent child rather than an adult who makes educated choices for themselves, and have only themselves to blame if things don't work out. The fundamental problem here is lack of personal responsibility, then crying when some one else fucks it up. If you take responsibility for your own trades you don't have to worry about anyone else screwing up but yourself.

So you trade only with persons you know IRL since at least 2 years?

Person to person transactions, as you say, doesn't change the fact that you can be scammed, in any way. If I want to buy something, I have no guarantee whatsoever that it will be sent unless I know really well the seller and trust him. But to trust him, I need to have made at least a few deals with him.

Trust is built, built on what? On successfull exchanges. And I don't see the link between "your own ability to make sound judgements" and business trust. You're saying we should make researches on everyone we trade with? Fair enough, and how do you do when it's a first trade for someone? Imagine someone wanting to sell a 700$ worth miner, but he's not a legendary trusted member and never made a trade here, he's still a newbie. So how do you do your "own judgement" TECSHARE here? Or you tell him "nah bro, can't deal with you, wait for 2 or 3 years and when I'll know you better then maybe.

Not saying escrow is perfect, but you can't say it's just because "people are too lazy to do there own research".

+1 this ^^^.

TECSHARE's point seems to imply that taking any form of insurance to mitigate risk means you become a nanny state zombie. In practice, just how do you do 'research' and make sound judgements when dealing in irreversible currency with an internet anon?
Also, the list of people scammed by supposed 'trusted friends' is never ending.

Insurance is not the same thing as putting responsibility for your assets in the hands of a 3rd party. As far as the point about the "nanny state" you are correct, this is exactly the kind of sentiment that breeds loss of freedom and totalitarianism. Absolute freedom and absolute security are mutually exclusive. This is an ancient con game, and it always starts with people giving up personal responsibility for their actions and expecting some "nanny" to fix it all for them when things go wrong. You are so unsure of your own judgement and so afraid of getting ripped off, you don't realize the nanny is the biggest threat, and you run willingly into her arms just to have some one lie to you and tell you it will be ok no matter what, and give you that guarantee you so desire at any cost. As far as your "never ending list of trusted friends", if you keep getting ripped off, perhaps you should stop using the trust system and find out who is actually trustworthy with research. BTW, its called Google.

[1714050680]

1714050680

[1714050680]

1714050680

[flagpara]

You're right it was getting a bit off topic.

Lack of personal responsibility? Maybe we don't get the same definition but that's not what I would have said.
But let it get straight to the choice:
-You can do deals on one and one, without third party, but then you have tot rust completely your trading partner. Best solution, but you NEED to trust your partner.
-You can do deals with people you still don't know, involving a third party.

The third party question is not a question of denying personal responsibility, it's a question of limiting the risks. I want to make a deal with a newbie i never heard of. Sending him the money leads to 90% of scam. Taking an escrow and sending him the money leads to maybe 0.5% of scam.
I don't see lack of responsibility here, just pure logic.

And yes when you get scam by the escrow you go whining and trying to find your money back, the same way that when you take your car and get an accident you go whining and try to be repaid by the assurance. And if the assurance take your money and go, you'll try to bring it to the court.

In fact I don't understand why you're saying it's not normal no use escrow, it's just a logical safer way. Not perfect, but still safer.

[TECSHARE]

You're right it was getting a bit off topic.

Lack of personal responsibility? Maybe we don't get the same definition but that's not what I would have said.
But let it get straight to the choice:
-You can do deals on one and one, without third party, but then you have tot rust completely your trading partner. Best solution, but you NEED to trust your partner.
-You can do deals with people you still don't know, involving a third party.

The third party question is not a question of denying personal responsibility, it's a question of limiting the risks. I want to make a deal with a newbie i never heard of. Sending him the money leads to 90% of scam. Taking an escrow and sending him the money leads to maybe 0.5% of scam.
I don't see lack of responsibility here, just pure logic.

And yes when you get scam by the escrow you go whining and trying to find your money back, the same way that when you take your car and get an accident you go whining and try to be repaid by the assurance. And if the assurance take your money and go, you'll try to bring it to the court.

In fact I don't understand why you're saying it's not normal no use escrow, it's just a logical safer way. Not perfect, but still safer.

I am not going to bother responding to your stats, because clearly they are pulled directly from your ass and do not at all reflect reality. Furthermore if you are getting robbed in 90% of your P2P trades you are probably retarded and should be in a special home where people can look after you.

I think the important part you are missing is, by taking these smaller risks, over time you build up an ACTUAL trust network, not just some bullshit trust profile like here on the forum. Trading with some one via an escrow does not prove they are trustworthy. The only way to prove some one is trustworthy is to allow them the opportunity to steal from you, and they CHOOSE not to. In exchange for those repeated smaller risks you get an ACTUAL trust network, because you know who you can trust with what, for how much, and how long, because you know your trading partners. This is the main point I am trying to make besides taking personal responsibility for your own trades. You can call it insurance if it makes you feel better. I call it asking for guarantees that don't exist.

This process is the ONLY WAY to refine your scam detecting abilities, and over time with actual effort (I know thinking is hard) scam artists might as well have CON written on their forehead because that is how transparent they become. With everyone just playing it "safe" with escrows, everyone is always depending on some one else to secure their funds, and leaving themselves mostly ignorant of the methods scam artists use, leaving them open to continual and systematic abuse rather than simply learning from their mistakes. Just like a mother can't baby proof the world and the child needs to learn to scrape his knee, users need to learn how to fuck up and walk around a while a little confused so they can truly understand their surroundings and not just hide behind the responsibility of other people and expect protection.

[flagpara]

They're not statistic i pull from my ass, they're a metaphoric illustration. Not just because there is a "%" it immediately becomes a statistic.

What you're saying is nonsense because it doesn't apply to most people. You're talking about a "trust network", but that's for businesses and traders. Most people and users don't give a damn about a trust network for the only reason that they have no use of it. We mainly do punctual deals, without the idea of finding a good trading partner for the future. We just want to buy something we need right now, without the need of building a long term relationship!

You keep escaping my example. I'm a newbie wanting to sell an s7 used miner, I want to sell it 1.5k$ and you want to buy it. What do you do without escrow? You believe in me?

That's what most people do, punctual important transactions. And that's where we use escrow, I don't see how you can do it without.

[TECSHARE]

They're not statistic i pull from my ass, they're a metaphoric illustration. Not just because there is a "%" it immediately becomes a statistic.

What you're saying is nonsense because it doesn't apply to most people. You're talking about a "trust network", but that's for businesses and traders. Most people and users don't give a damn about a trust network for the only reason that they have no use of it. We mainly do punctual deals, without the idea of finding a good trading partner for the future. We just want to buy something we need right now, without the need of building a long term relationship!

You keep escaping my example. I'm a newbie wanting to sell an s7 used miner, I want to sell it 1.5k$ and you want to buy it. What do you do without escrow? You believe in me?

That's what most people do, punctual important transactions. And that's where we use escrow, I don't see how you can do it without.

No businesses operate without trust networks. People without trust networks are the ones that get robbed taking chances on randoms over and over, in Bitcoin and in all business. As far as your example, its simple. If it is too risky, you say send it to me first. If that doesn't work try saying this..."no". I know that was complicated right? Everything you said was pulled directly from your ass. Nice debate.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

Tec, you are debating someone who is accustomed to bare feet and dirt floors.  Pulling things out of his ass has been a lifelong habit that now has been extended to his bitcoin "business".  Whatever that is.

[TECSHARE]

Tec, you are debating someone who is accustomed to bare feet and dirt floors.  Pulling things out of his ass has been a lifelong habit that now has been extended to his bitcoin "business".  Whatever that is.

Believe it or not, I didn't just post this for him. I was hoping other people with a more impressive collection of brain cells might read/learn/comment.

[TECSHARE]

- snip -
All the things that have been happening with escrows require that the most trusted ones keep providing their services and/or that new, trusted people start providing escrow services. Having you exiting your escrowing services is pretty bad, IMO.

If people took the time to think about how valuable the service is that well run and trustworthy escrow provides, and then compensated the escrow provider appropriately for the value provided then people like Blazed and myself wouldn't have stopped.

Unfortunately when everything goes smoothly, like it does 99% of the time, nobody even thinks about how much the security and peace of mind were really worth.  They tip nothing at all or less than $2 worth of bitcoins.

When I held escrows, all escrow-ed funds were held on single use paper wallets that were generated on a permanently offline computer and that were stored in a secure location.  I wrote up custom escrow agreements that laid out exactly how the transaction was expected to progress as well as laying out exactly what would happen in a variety of common situations.  If I was going to be unavailable for release at any time, all parties involved were informed ahead of time. I made sure that all parties were provided with multiple ways to contact me if bitcointalk became unavailable (phone number, email address, and frequently a U.S.P.S. mailing address). All of this time and effort for between 0 BTC and 0.01 BTC most of the time.  I could earn more running a lemonade stand on a cold day in the middle of nowhere.

In the beginning I did it because I wanted to make it easier for users of the forum that didn't have any way of trusting each other to be able to engage in transactions.  I was motivated largely because there weren't many merchants or exchanges available, and if bitcoin was going to be useful, then this forum was going to be where that usefulness was proven.  Since then there are several well trusted exchanges and many large public merchants that accept bitcoin as payment.  Additionally there were several new escrow providers that I found to be sloppy and uncommunicative, yet users were flocking to them for some reason.  At that point it just didn't make sense anymore to spend time and effort for a service that clearly wasn't desired.

Another very good point. This is the same reason I never tried very hard to get escrow work. It pays like shit and no one really appreciates it, and it is often a huge pain in the ass. For what? To get paid some pocket change to take on huge financial liabilities? Try taking responsibility for your own funds people.

[dooglus]

What you're saying is nonsense because it doesn't apply to most people. You're talking about a "trust network", but that's for businesses and traders. Most people and users don't give a damn about a trust network for the only reason that they have no use of it. We mainly do punctual deals, without the idea of finding a good trading partner for the future. We just want to buy something we need right now, without the need of building a long term relationship!

I think the key element of "trust network" that you are missing is the word "network".

I never traded with you, and I don't know whether to trust you. But a guy I regularly trade with regularly trades with a guy who says we would trust you with up to $100. I only have very few contacts, but they each have people they trust, and the network fans out like that. Don't treat people's trust rating here as meaning anything at all. The last I heard my rating was negative because some guy got mad when I criticized a site he owned and so he left me unrelated negative feedback as punishment. Instead look at my feedback, so whether you trust any of the people who rated me, and make your decision accordingly.

Reading this might help.

You keep escaping my example. I'm a newbie wanting to sell an s7 used miner, I want to sell it 1.5k$ and you want to buy it. What do you do without escrow? You believe in me?

If you're a newbie, you send first. That's the cost of being a newbie.

That's what most people do, punctual important transactions. And that's where we use escrow, I don't see how you can do it without.

If the newbie uses escrow every time he trades, he is forever a newbie. If you never give him the chance to steal from you, how can you know he won't steal from you when you give him the opportunity?

[TECSHARE]

This whole idea of this trust system as we currently have here is a nightmare and just gives con artists a perfect turnkey scamming opportunity. It should have been scrapped a long time ago, but people keep defending it like a battered wife makes excuses for her abusive husband. We need to pull the plug and force people to build actual networks of real human trust instead of just perpetually changing noob's diapers for them so they never learn to shit in a toilet, forever dependent and vulnerable. Scammers like it that way.

[flagpara]

No businesses operate without trust networks.

Wrong. Every business "starting" operates without trust networks, as it takes time to be built. That's the main idea I was defending, that escrows can be a good solution for important deals you HAVE to do with people you don't know yet...

And as I said in my last post you talk only about BUSINESSES!!! I talk about people. How hard is it to understand that it's not the same thing?

People without trust networks are the ones that get robbed taking chances on randoms over and over, in Bitcoin and in all business. As far as your example, its simple. If it is too risky, you say send it to me first. If that doesn't work try saying this..."no". I know that was complicated right?

Incredible. So that's your solution? You buy/sell only from people you know and you trust? Again, HOW DO YOU START?
That means you never do a deal until you have at least the faith of the community, which is a shame cause that could be a good deal... And if I got to wait until I'm hero member before you can even think about trading with me it's a bit a slow process...

Everything you said was pulled directly from your ass. Nice debate.

Believe it or not, I didn't just post this for him. I was hoping other people with a more impressive collection of brain cells might read/learn/comment.

I just don't know how you can say that. I create examples and try to discuss on hypothetical cases. You just insult me. You don't even bother answering my questions. You just threw your hate with a pedantic attitude like you know everything. Well kido it seems you don't know a lot...
God how I can hate this community. No wonder why bitcoin only has this horrible reputation. Shitty community with scammers haters and pedantic people.

Nice debate indeed.


"Forum scapegoat" you say in your personal message. Maybe more like "forum random asshole insulting people on a random basis just because they have the horrible idea of not being of the same point of view and they dare using a metaphoric illustration I don't understand".

[flagpara]

That's what most people do, punctual important transactions. And that's where we use escrow, I don't see how you can do it without.

If the newbie uses escrow every time he trades, he is forever a newbie. If you never give him the chance to steal from you, how can you know he won't steal from you when you give him the opportunity?

You're right of course. But the point of building a trust network is to have people you trust to deal on a regular basis. What I'm trying to say is that it's a useless effort and risk if you're just a random dude trying to settle just a few deals a year. Which is the case of most people. In those cases escrow seems like a good option to me, but of course if you intend to make lots of deals on lots of domains, it's better to take time to build a network.

But again here you're acting more like a business than a person. You don't have to convince me of the use of a trust network for a business, but for somebody normal 

[TECSHARE]

No businesses operate without trust networks.

Wrong. Every business "starting" operates without trust networks, as it takes time to be built. That's the main idea I was defending, that escrows can be a good solution for important deals you HAVE to do with people you don't know yet...

And as I said in my last post you talk only about BUSINESSES!!! I talk about people. How hard is it to understand that it's not the same thing?

People without trust networks are the ones that get robbed taking chances on randoms over and over, in Bitcoin and in all business. As far as your example, its simple. If it is too risky, you say send it to me first. If that doesn't work try saying this..."no". I know that was complicated right?

Incredible. So that's your solution? You buy/sell only from people you know and you trust? Again, HOW DO YOU START?
That means you never do a deal until you have at least the faith of the community, which is a shame cause that could be a good deal... And if I got to wait until I'm hero member before you can even think about trading with me it's a bit a slow process...

Everything you said was pulled directly from your ass. Nice debate.

Believe it or not, I didn't just post this for him. I was hoping other people with a more impressive collection of brain cells might read/learn/comment.

I just don't know how you can say that. I create examples and try to discuss on hypothetical cases. You just insult me. You don't even bother answering my questions. You just threw your hate with a pedantic attitude like you know everything. Well kido it seems you don't know a lot...
God how I can hate this community. No wonder why bitcoin only has this horrible reputation. Shitty community with scammers haters and pedantic people.

Nice debate indeed.


"Forum scapegoat" you say in your personal message. Maybe more like "forum random asshole insulting people on a random basis just because they have the horrible idea of not being of the same point of view and they dare using a metaphoric illustration I don't understand".

Nonsense. no business operates completely without trust networks. Every business needs capital, supplies, tools, support, transportation, etc they they completely depend upon to complete their business model. There is no such thing as a business without a trust network. It often begins with 0 trust, but it is still a trust network nonetheless, based upon taking risks and then making a individualized trust assessment for the individual or company. You are claiming there are deals you HAVE to do but you simultaneously claim you don't have to trust anyone. Even when you use an escrow you have to trust the escrow. Hence there is no such thing as trade without some level of trust, even if it is blind trust.

Don't blame me because your "hypothetical cases" are pathetic and without basis. I don't owe respect to your opinion just because you took the time to type it. As far as the "insults", hardly, you seem to have more of an issue with me pointing out your "hypothetical cases" are pulled directly from your ass and have no basis in real world scenarios. If I didn't bother answering your questions chances are they were a waste of time to ask to begin with let alone to answer.

P.S. You might want to look up the definition for "pedantic", I don't think that word means what you think it does. If you used the word "arrogant" or something at least that would make sense, but you are right, I should respect your opinions just because you can string together a collection of mismatched words with incorrect context and usage along side made up scenarios to create a superficial appearance of an "argument" for yourself.  Also you weren't using a metaphor, might want to look that one up too. Maybe learn to command the English language before you demand respect for your half-assed opinions on complicated systems like trust networks.

[flagpara]

Nonsense. no business operates completely without trust networks. Every business needs capital, supplies, tools, support, transportation, etc they they completely depend upon to complete their business model. There is no such thing as a business without a trust network. It often begins with 0 trust, but it is still a trust network nonetheless, based upon taking risks and then making a individualized trust assessment for the individual or company. You are claiming there are deals you HAVE to do but you simultaneously claim you don't have to trust anyone. Even when you use an escrow you have to trust the escrow. Hence there is no such thing as trade without some level of trust, even if it is blind trust.

Splendid. So you're saying a 0 trust trust network is still a trust network. Well in this sense you're right. It's useless and doesn't make any sense but very well, you are right.

Don't blame me because your "hypothetical cases" are pathetic and without basis. I don't owe respect to your opinion just because you took the time to type it. As far as the "insults", hardly, you seem to have more of an issue with me pointing out your "hypothetical cases" are pulled directly from your ass and have no basis in real world scenarios. If I didn't bother answering your questions chances are they were a waste of time to ask to begin with let alone to answer.
[\quote]

Sure. You just don't take in account the fact that I'm talking about PERSONS and not BUSINESSES. But yes I'm the one wasting my time no doubt about that.

And sorry to tell you that a one time deal is a very "real world scenario"...

As far as the "insults" I would dare say that talking about my "few brain cells" can and should be considered as an insult. Maybe we don't have the same definition though.

P.S. You might want to look up the definition for "pedantic", I don't think that word means what you think it does. If you used the word "arrogant" or something at least that would make sense, but you are right, I should respect your opinions just because you can string together a collection of mismatched words with incorrect context and usage along side made up scenarios to create a superficial appearance of an "argument" for yourself.  Also you weren't using a metaphor, might want to look that one up too. Maybe learn to command the English language before you demand respect for your half-assed opinions on complicated systems like trust networks.

Marvelous. So now we're going into the "start to learn English before arguing"? Well as you wish. I'm not a native english speaker so I might be wrong on some terms. But here it seems you're wrong, though "arrogant" qualifies you as well of course, don't worry.
Definition of pedantic in English:
adjective

Excessively concerned with minor details or rules; overscrupulous

As your main process is taking half of one of my argument (upon 2 or 3) and explaining why it is not exactly right, I would say that pedantic qualifies you rather well.

And yes some would say that you could respect one's opinion just because he took the time to explain it. It's called being a civilized or a polite person. Seems like everything is said here though.

[TECSHARE]

It doesn't matter one bit if it is a business or a "normal person" as you put it. Individuals also need trust networks as well, and they directly benefit from them over time in the same way a business does. You made some comment about only doing a few trades, but this would be no different than some one buying some stuff in craigslist. There is no escrow there 98% of the time, and people get ripped off all the time. No need to include Bitcoin. However if these same people worked to develop trust networks thru their lifetime, then they have the opportunity to decrease their risk exponentially as they add more people to their network. No you aren't protected 100% of the time, but being protected 100% of the time is some bullshit fantasy standard. No one is protected 100% of the time in anything. The point is to admit you are taking risks, educate yourself, build networks of people you can trust, and take calculated risks if possible with people you already have dealt with.