Garr255/Werner - Auction shilling

[ThatDGuy]

Well why isnt he getting a scammer tag or anything then?

I am still waiting for him to follow through on his deal to send me 5btc and nothing.Also i would like to get a response on how you think its okay because he simply didnt say he wouldn't. That is how a 2 year old argues not an adult. If that is how the forum is gonna work pirate deserves his scammer tag removed as he never said he wouldnt disappear. The same goes for Matt.

Pirate promised to pay back people's money plus interest. Matthew promised to pay people who bet him if he lost. Garr255 promised nothing. I do not recognize any sort of implicit contract. Something isn't a binding auction just because it's in the Auctions section. (I realize that some libertarian philosophers do recognize many types of implicit contract, but I strongly disagree with this notion.)

If you mistrust Garr255, use the trust system. I'm not going to remove anyone from the default trust network for rating Garr255 negatively. But scammer tags require a more severe crime than just going against the expectations of bidders.

Didn't Garr255 himself basically say that he scammed people? He also said right in the following post that he would offer starsoccer9 and Vezunchik BTC5.

Hi all,

First, I apologize for taking too long to attempt to resolve this situation. I've been extremely frustrated with myself all day. I have been regretting what I have done since the moment I did it.

I hereby confess to bidding up my own auctions using the "Werner" forum handle. This is despicable, I know. I did this out of pure greed. Scamming anyone was not the priority, getting a few extra measly bitcoins for Cognitive's auction was my goal. I have always acted in the best interest of Cognitive, because I know, believe, and practice my fiduciary duty which comes as a result of handling others' assets. I want everyone to know that I will continue doing my best to run the company, the same as I always have. My track record on the forum has been flawless before this incident, and that's what hurts me most. I'm disgusted with myself when people are questioning whether they can trust me now.

Although some may view this as a petty offence (as I did previously), I do not any longer. As an attempt to at least partially make up for my wrongdoing, I am offering each of the participants in the auction, starsoccer9 and Vezunchik, BTC5 of my own personal funds, which more than makes up for the financial loss due false bids in the auction. I realize that what I have done is unacceptable, and I do deeply regret it.

[1715635723]

1715635723

[1715635723]

1715635723

[stereotype]

Well why isnt he getting a scammer tag or anything then?

I am still waiting for him to follow through on his deal to send me 5btc and nothing.Also i would like to get a response on how you think its okay because he simply didnt say he wouldn't. That is how a 2 year old argues not an adult. If that is how the forum is gonna work pirate deserves his scammer tag removed as he never said he wouldnt disappear. The same goes for Matt.

Pirate promised to pay back people's money plus interest. Matthew promised to pay people who bet him if he lost. Garr255 promised nothing. I do not recognize any sort of implicit contract. Something isn't a binding auction just because it's in the Auctions section. (I realize that some libertarian philosophers do recognize many types of implicit contract, but I strongly disagree with this notion.)

If you mistrust Garr255, use the trust system. I'm not going to remove anyone from the default trust network for rating Garr255 negatively. But scammer tags require a more severe crime than just going against the expectations of bidders.

I still dont see anything negative in Garr255's rating. Maybe some people expect a lead theymos. ??

[theymos]

Sorry dude, at this point, you are wearing the same shirt that Garr is.

Yes i agree. way back on page 8 i was feeling sympathetic with Garr due to that apology letter. i see that 12 hours later he has yet to reimburse starsoccer or to pay the 5 btc as promised. Theymos taking up for Garr is not a wise move from a pr standpoint. That's like a jew taking up for hitler--ok so the analogy isn't perfect, but basically at this point Garr has admitted to scamming and Theymos seems to be holding him to a different standing, possibly due to his role as a trustee of the forum.

Garr255 is not a trustee of the forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155002.0

I only have a mild interest in Garr255's particular case. But I am very annoyed by the incredibly stupid ideas about justice and ethics that many people in this thread seem to have. Garr255's actions were definitely unethical, but it's nothing like a real scam.

[boonies4u]

Pirate promised to pay back people's money plus interest. Matthew promised to pay people who bet him if he lost. Garr255 promised nothing. I do not recognize any sort of implicit contract. Something isn't a binding auction just because it's in the Auctions section. (I realize that some libertarian philosophers do recognize many types of implicit contract, but I strongly disagree with this notion.)

see

I am offering each of the participants in the auction, starsoccer9 and Vezunchik, BTC5 of my own personal funds, which more than makes up for the financial loss due false bids in the auction.

Until he "makes up for the financial loss" I wouldn't call this resolved.

[crumbs]

Didn't Garr255 himself basically say that he scammed people? He also said right in the following post that he would offer starsoccer9 and Vezunchik BTC5.

Yeah, but he wasn't properly mirandized.  So pics & GTFO!

[Vivisector999]

I know I am new here and all.  Interesting thread to read to try to figure out how everything is around here.  

1 thing I can't figure out though.  Everyone seems to be complaining about the auction shills, which seems to have happened not just the 1 time but at least 3 times.  (And only 1 shill was he considering paying people back (The one where he got caught red-handed)).  The forum admins here don't seem to care about the auction system here having any sort of validity.  But why is everyone missing the fact that not only was the Werner account shilling bids, he was also trolling others with it.  Maybe scamming and trolling are acceptable here???

LOL, anyways, glad I jumped on your site.  I haven't seen this much drama in a long time.

[r3wt]

Garr255's actions were definitely unethical, but it's nothing like a real scam.

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

[boonies4u]

LOL, anyways, glad I jumped on your site.  I haven't seen this much drama in a long time.

Welcome :3

[starsoccer9]

Sorry dude, at this point, you are wearing the same shirt that Garr is.

Yes i agree. way back on page 8 i was feeling sympathetic with Garr due to that apology letter. i see that 12 hours later he has yet to reimburse starsoccer or to pay the 5 btc as promised. Theymos taking up for Garr is not a wise move from a pr standpoint. That's like a jew taking up for hitler--ok so the analogy isn't perfect, but basically at this point Garr has admitted to scamming and Theymos seems to be holding him to a different standing, possibly due to his role as a trustee of the forum.

Garr255 is not a trustee of the forum:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155002.0

I only have a mild interest in Garr255's particular case. But I am very annoyed by the incredibly stupid ideas about justice and ethics that many people in this thread seem to have. Garr255's actions were definitely unethical, but it's nothing like a real scam.

So it was unethical but not a scam, at least we are getting somewhere. I am quite sure shill bidding is illegal on almost all auction sites and anyone who has dealt with one would call it fraud.

[theymos]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

[ThatDGuy]

The forum admins here don't seem to care about the auction system here having any sort of validity.  But why is everyone missing the fact that not only was the Werner account shilling bids, he was also trolling others with it.  Maybe scamming and trolling are acceptable here???

The trolling aspect was covered pretty well in this thread.

Chronologically, a lot took place in that one before this scam accusation thread started.  This scam accusation thread only began a little after this point in the original thread:

Now, aside this BFL story, I never believed in sock-puppets accusations. (call me naive, yes)
I thought...what would be the real purpose of such account?
I mean, what the heck can I do with a new account and I can't do with the old one?

So now that I found that I was wrong...really Garr255, what is the purpose of this Werner account of yours?
I am just curious.

[Vivisector999]

Lol, too many threads to follow.  Lots of action to catch up on.  Will read that one next 

[starsoccer9]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

what ever, not gonna argue with you. Just to still make it known, I have gotten no contact from garr or any money

[Este Nuno]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

As I learned after Josh and Luke Jr. defrauded people who bet against BFL on betsofbitcoin: Actions qualifying as fraud do not necessarily and often do not qualify one for a 'scammer' tag here.

I guess I'm understanding that theymos' criteria for a 'scammer' tag is simply breach of an agreed upon explicit contract.

I think a big part of the problem here is the use of the word 'scammer'. That word holds many different connotations to different people. Clearly theymos wants this forum to operate independently of any established social norms. Which is interesting, but not too surprising considering his political views.

Theymos, you should perhaps consider changing the phrasing of the tag to something more specific. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of this drama relating to people arguing over things they think qualify for the tag could be avoided.

[Este Nuno]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

what ever, not gonna argue with you. Just to still make it known, I have gotten no contact from garr or any money

And if my understanding of forum policy is correct. You can expect Garr to get a scammer tag if you do not receive your 5 bitcoins.

[KarmaShark]

Having an alt that artificially raises the bid price is similar to a secret reserve price in an auction. There's nothing inherently wrong with it

Garr255 never promised not to bid on his own auctions. He never even promised to honor the results of the auctions. Without contracts that say otherwise, auctions are only devices to assist in price negotiations.

Then these quotes should be stickied at the top of the auction page.  Better yet:

Bid here only to a maximum of what you are willing to spend.  Auctioneers may opt to artificially inflate the price using alternate accounts if necessary.  No one is putting a gun to your head to outbid said alternate accounts.  Shilling/sock-puppeting is condoned and expected behavior.  Bid accordingly.

I would request the above, if true, be stickied at the top of the auction page.

Well, it's true, we had confirmation from the forum admin.

So, +1 to the sticky.

What is the official stance on this? Is bidding on your own auctions using an alternative user account / personality acceptable auction behaviour? Yes, we all agree it is unethical behaviour, but is it condoned? I will not do this to other forum members however many other forum members will delight in the ability to swindle extra ฿ out of the community, consequence free.

This is evident by the litany of theft and crime that takes place in the community. More time is spent on trying to track down the broken pieces of deals and agreements than is spent driving the eco-system forward. I want to know if I will be competing with multiple personality accounts on future auctions, I think other honest forum members deserve to be made aware if this is an environment that will continue to allow this deceitful behaviour to prosper.

Lastly, the Trust system here holds no value. Anyone that has/is/will give Gar255 or any of his multiple personality accounts a positive rating may have done so under false pretences, as well as many other dishonest forum members who shill bid or performed other underhanded works under the guise of another forum account.

Long story short: This community must start to work together to protect itself from the wolves, which are closing in on the sheep as we speak.

[kakobrekla]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

Theymos is proud to have double standards.

[crumbs]

[...]
The preceding ethical analysis is irrelevant to forum administration, though. Scammer tags are given, in general, to people who break explicit agreements.

...and those agreements better be air-tight, 'coz when socking & shilling are legitimized by not being specifically forbidden, best not assume anything 

[SgtSpike]

TIL a person can be a scammer on bitcointalk without actually being labeled as one.

[Pale Phoenix]

fyi, shill bidding is a felony in the United states, so there again, whether or not it was a real scam is subject to conjecture/opinion.

sources: My uncle runs an auction house in Little Rock, Arkansas.

It's also a felony to resist the government's violent thugs, and the US is fine with bombing innocent people, so I don't put much stock in the US's view on ethics.

But is there a reason that shilling and dupe accounts are not prohibited by the TOS? Is that an ideological choice?

It seems to me that you either promote fair dealing or you don't, and while I agree that auction shilling isn't anywhere near pirate level, felonious behavior, it certainly isn't fair dealing. You can't get a little bit pregnant.