Multi-Accounting Scammer Viceroy/buyer VIEW BONUS: Grue and Crumbs Bitchfight

[Oldsport]

Can we address the fact that user: Viceroy keeps making accounts and trying to ruin my credibility with said accounts.

He uses multiple accounts to push his agendas and tries to act as if these "alts" are different people.



Of course it should not surprise you when you're the one that made the OP!



He then claims I'm a scammer because I use self moderated threads. Yet look at all of his "sales" threads!- self-moderated:







Now look at the links. Viceroy is fond of speaking to himself, especially in the third person.





 


I've decided to add this here:

Ive done successful  trades with oldsport, and he seems a very trustworthy guy. That is all I have to say on this matter. I do not know anything about this case, and the accusations as the OP and OS were the only ones involved. Just wanted to put that out there, Ive done several transactions with Oldsport, and he has always been honest, and courteous.

I urge the rest of the multitudes I've successfully transacted with to come out and post and those who want to slander me to come out and post. We will compare and come to a conclusion once and for all. As you can see this thread is not self moderated so no deleting will be going on.

This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:

Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40

[grue]

A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence.

In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual

Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?

[Oldsport]

A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence.

In criminal law, fraud is intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual

Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?

He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.

[Bogdan]

That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.

[Oldsport]

That is an immature and idiotic thing to do, I hope it gets stopped.

As do I. Annoying having multiple accounts is not against the rule so this idiot is able to run rampant

[grue]

[...]
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?

He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.

Then you're only accusing him of slander. That's very different from "scammer". It's ironic how you're accusing him of slandering, yet you're slandering him yourself.

[Oldsport]

[...]
Tell me, how did Viceroy/buyer intentionally deceive you for personal gain after gaining your confidence?

He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads. I notice all his hostility started when I begin selling moneypaks thus threatening his idiotic startup.

Then you're only accusing him of slander. That's very different from "scammer". It's ironic how you're accusing him of slandering, yet you're slandering him yourself.

You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.

[Vod]

Then you're only accusing him of slander. That's very different from "scammer". It's ironic how you're accusing him of slandering, yet you're slandering him yourself.

Slander is also different than libel.   

[Matthew N. Wright]

Oldsport, I have no opinion on the topic at hand, other than to say that what you're accusing that member of is typical of most members here. Did you really think all the members on this forum who post in "praise" of another member are separate individuals? Did you really think that everyone hates Ripple? Did you really think that anyone used that new Altcoin that came out yesterday? Welcome to the idiotic world of anonymity.

[grue]

You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.

A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. You argue that:

He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads

A scam (by definition) requires an entity to be defrauded after their confidence was gained. You can argue that slandering you is "fraud", which is a stretch. But even that were true, it would not constitute a scam because he did not gain your confidence. The best you can do is call him an attempted scammer, but even that's a stretch unless you can show he is deceiving someone.

In addition, if your logic were true, it would mean political attack ads are "scams", which is absurd.

[Oldsport]

You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.

A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. You argue that:

He's trying to deceive others by slandering my name so I appear less credible when I expose him on his threads

A scam (by definition) requires an entity to be defrauded after their confidence was gained. You can argue that slandering you is "fraud", which is a stretch. But even that were true, it would not constitute a scam because he did not gain your confidence. The best you can do is call him an attempted scammer, but even that's a stretch unless you can show he is deceiving someone.

In addition, if your logic were true, it would mean political attack ads are "scams", which is absurd.

I'm not here to debate with you. Unless you have something to contribute to the situation please refrain from posting. It's distracting people from the topic at hand.

[crumbs]

You gave me your definition of scam: "A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme and scam) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence." And I showed you how Viceroy& co. met the criteria. So how so is it very different? I'm also not slandering anyone. I'm defending myself by explaining to people what's truly going on.

A scammer is a person who has defrauded (intentionally deceive for personal gain) someone after gaining their confidence. [...]

Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"?  Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:
So, unless this forum has its own strict technical definition, it goes something like this:

scam (skm) Slang
n.
A fraudulent business scheme; a swindle.
tr.v. scammed, scam·ming, scams
To defraud; swindle.
-->
swin·dle  (swndl)
v. swin·dled, swin·dling, swin·dles
v.tr.
1. To cheat or defraud of money or property.
2. To obtain by fraudulent means: swindled money from the company.
v.intr.
To practice fraud as a means of obtaining money or property.
n.
The act or an instance of swindling.
-->
fraud (frôd)
n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

So yeah, socking is fraud.

[grue]

I'm not here to debate with you. Unless you have something to contribute to the situation please refrain from posting. It's distracting people from the topic at hand.

Oh boo fucking hoo. You're just mad that someone has a differing opinion. This is a forum, a place for debate. You're making false accusations against a forum member. In addition, you're using misleading words in an attempt to discredit him. And with all of this, you're expecting no challenge from other members? How about you start a self moderated topic so your little special space where you can't have your views challenged.

"It's distracting people from the topic at hand." What's wrong, are you upset that people are poking holes in your argument?

Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"?  Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:

read the first few posts.

[...]
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

So yeah, socking is fraud.

But how is using another account impersonating anyone? According to that logic, anyone on 4chan is an "imposter", because they're all "[assuming] a false pose".

[crumbs]

Where do people get these strict definitions of "scam"?  Scam is a non-technical slang term, and is defined very loosely:

read the first few posts.

[...]
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

So yeah, socking is fraud.

But how is using another account impersonating anyone? According to that logic, anyone on 4chan is an "imposter", because they're all "[assuming] a false pose".

Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"?  Selective redacting much?

fraud (frôd)
n.
1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.

This help?

Edit:  Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone.  If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill.  'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?

[grue]

Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"?  Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?

Let me tear part the rest of them as well.

A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

Let's assume that definition is true. According to that definition, Obama will be a "scammer", because he deceived the public (pick one of his campaign promises), for personal gain (getting elected is a pretty big gain). Obviously this is absurd. You can call him a liar, but it would be a stretch to call him a "scammer".

A piece of trickery; a trick.

This definition is problematic because it only requires some sort of deception to be considered as "scamming". As illustrated above, merely deceiving someone can not be called scamming.

One that defrauds; a cheat.

A person who defrauds is a fraud? You don't say!

edit: saw your edit, so i'll include a response to your edited part as well

Edit:  Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone.  If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill.  'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?

I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing.

[Oldsport]

Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"?  Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?

Let me tear part the rest of them as well.

A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

Let's assume that definition is true. According to that definition, Obama will be a "scammer", because he deceived the public (pick one of his campaign promises), for personal gain (getting elected is a pretty big gain). Obviously this is absurd. You can call him a liar, but it would be a stretch to call him a "scammer".

A piece of trickery; a trick.

This definition is problematic because it only requires some sort of deception to be considered as "scamming". As illustrated above, merely deceiving someone can not be called scamming.

One that defrauds; a cheat.

A person who defrauds is a fraud? You don't say!

edit: saw your edit, so i'll include a response to your edited part as well

Edit:  Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone.  If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill.  'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?

I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing.

Listen, this is not the place to try and put your yellowing law degree to use. Stop spamming the thread.

[crumbs]

Wait, you honestly missed everything above "impostor"?  Selective redacting much?
[...]
This help?

Let me tear part the rest of them as well.

A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

Let's assume that definition is true. According to that definition, Obama will be a "scammer", because he deceived the public (pick one of his campaign promises), for personal gain (getting elected is a pretty big gain). Obviously this is absurd. You can call him a liar, but it would be a stretch to call him a "scammer".

A piece of trickery; a trick.

This definition is problematic because it only requires some sort of deception to be considered as "scamming". As illustrated above, merely deceiving someone can not be called scamming.

One that defrauds; a cheat.

A person who defrauds is a fraud? You don't say!
edit: saw your edit, so i'll include a response to your edited part as well

Edit:  Not defending OldSport, just pointing out that the narrow interpretation of "scammer" isn't helping anyone.  If people post in "Scam Accusations," they obviously feel their grievance fits the bill.  'Till there's a "Things mistakenly thought to be scams but technically aren't" forum, why not use this as a catch-all?

I'm not defending Viceroy/buyer's actions either. I find it wrong for OldSport to use sensationalist titles and words to slander is opponent, yet he's accusing him of the very same thing.

You seem to have missed my point: This is the subforum for non-technical grievances.  Being the only one, it's also the most fitting. Human language is horribly imprecise, dicdefs are horribly vague, incomplete, obsolescent &, on top of that, inconsistent across publishers/versions/dates.  English is not a formal language, dicdefs are descriptive, not definitive -- any logical deduction is guaranteed to end in disaster:  Garbage in - garbage out. i hope we're on the same page.
Just to humor you, and 'coz i'm as neardsly, i'll address your first one:
Of course, when Obama lied, he scammed the american people.  We good?

[Oldsport]

This is where he gets the accounts he uses to accuse me:

Him and BTCtalkaccounts ARE THE SAME.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226260.40

[r3wt]

if i was you i wouldn't worry about it.

[Oldsport]

if i was you i wouldn't worry about it.

Normally I wouldn't but since some people have actually started to believe his bs, this thread became very necessary.





UPDATE:

A threat sent via PM:

Just a heads up, you don't wanna trifle with BTCTalkAccounts. he is dangerous imo. google the word "doxxing". this is more or less what he does for a living. he steals peoples identities and extorts payment from them in bitcoin. he did it to me just this past week.