Garr255/Werner - Auction shilling

[Garr255]

I was recently contacted by Garr to remove my negative trust rating for him.  I declined, based on the "could have lost" clause.  I would recommend the original two highest bidders to consider this action.

That is false. I requested you to change the "btc risked" from 2 to zero, because you never had any btc at risk. I respect your decision not to change it despite the fact that I disagree with it.

I agree that trust takes a lifetime to build, and only a few posts to obliterate.

[1713980158]

1713980158

[1713980158]

1713980158

[1713980158]

1713980158

[boonies4u]

No punishment and no negative rating will only cause the thieves to flourish.  If he wants to rebuild his trust, let it take longer than a few days. 

+1

[stereotype]

This is going to rumble on until some sort of tag is associated with garr255. If im reading it right, the majority of the people reading and considering this Shillgate shitstorm, either want a tag, or cant understand why some sort of meaningful sanction has not been metered out.

While we wait for the mod/s, should it be a time limited negative tag posted by theymos/mod with "The community has found garr255 to be untrustworthy. Pending re-occurrence, this tag will be removed in 6 months"?

It draws a line in the sand, it allows garr255 something to 'work to/achieve', and it allows theymos not to infringe his own ideas/agenda.

OR, we carry on trying to fill this void, and see who else gets dragged into this.

[stereotype]

5 BTC for victims (that weren't victims of theft) isn't punishment?

It was not forced. They want theymos to be totalitarian and will stop at nothing less.

They hate his libertairian freemarket idealz.

Who's 'they'?

[crumbs]

5 BTC for victims (that weren't victims of theft) isn't punishment?

It was not forced. They want theymos to be totalitarian and will stop at nothing less.

They hate his libertairian freemarket idealz.

The people who think theymos needs to enforce the rules of ebay and the us govt on this private forum.

Who's 'they'?

Don't the local Randist-Anarchists default to lex mercatoria (yeah, i had to highlight & hit "search with google" too, it's medieval market law ) in cases where Atlas Shrugged is open to interpretation? 
Or am i getting my factions mixed up

[Rampion]

5 BTC for victims (that weren't victims of theft) isn't punishment?

It was not forced. They want theymos to be totalitarian and will stop at nothing less.

They hate his libertairian freemarket idealz.

Sorry Goat, but libertarianism/anarchism has nothing in common with deception and unethical behavior. "free market" does not equals to "everything is allowed in the name of greed". In libertarian communities the members of that community debate in assemblies to reach consensus about rules, even if no one is forced to follow them at gunpoint.

The fact is here a lot of people call themselves "libertarians", but still we just see the typical hierarchical structures that have nothing to do with libertarian ideals. Did you see any kind of poll or public call for the people to debate and reach consensus about what to do?

Not a hint. We have a hierarchical structure represented by the mods and specifically theymos, that tell us what is "the forum policy". We either accept it or GTFO.

Yeah, libertarian my ass. Someone needs to read some books by Prudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin or Rudolf Rocker. Maybe the guys in here read a couple of texts by Rothbard and think they understand what the word "libertarianism" means, but they are very mistaken.

Edit: just wanted to add that until now I was pretty satisfied about how the conflicts were resolved on this forum. I had the impression that the mods followed "common sense", and that their resolutions satisfied the huge majority of the community. In this case I'm not so sure, I know I was disappointed, and it seems to me that the vast majority of the members dislike how this matter was handled. It's sad, but it seems that the ones defending Garr255 are either their friends or have common business with him, while all the others are not satisfied about the final outcome of this "shillgate affaire"

[starsoccer9]

5 BTC for victims (that weren't victims of theft) isn't punishment?

It was not forced. They want theymos to be totalitarian and will stop at nothing less.

They hate his libertairian freemarket idealz.

The people who think theymos needs to enforce the rules of ebay and the us govt on this private forum.

Who's 'they'?

Don't the local Randist-Anarchists default to lex mercatoria (yeah, i had to highlight & hit "search with google" too, it's medieval market law ) in cases where Atlas Shrugged is open to interpretation? 
Or am i getting my factions mixed up

The main issue is that what a scammer here means is differnt than what most think. After lurking for a year and then trolling for two i fully understand the local law.

I also understand why it is what it is.

There was no chance garr was going to get any sort of tag or other past actions would then have to be relooked at.

Yeah i do biz with garr but if you have been active in the last two years iv done biz with you.

I bet im the most scammed person here on the forum there is even a thread about the millions i have lost.

Oh well...

You guys just need to lurk moar.

Ive been here for over a year, so im expecting by my second year to have done business with you 

[Rampion]

5 BTC for victims (that weren't victims of theft) isn't punishment?

It was not forced. They want theymos to be totalitarian and will stop at nothing less.

They hate his libertairian freemarket idealz.

Sorry Goat, but libertarianism/anarchism has nothing in common with deception and unethical behavior. "free market" does not equals to "everything is allowed in the name of greed". In libertarian communities the members of that community debate in assemblies to reach consensus about rules, even if no one is forced to follow them at gunpoint.

The fact is here a lot of people call themselves "libertarians", but still we just see the typical hierarchical structures that have nothing to do with libertarian ideals. Did you see any kind of poll or public call for the people to debate and reach consensus about what to do?

Not a hint. We have a hierarchical structure represented by the mods on specifically theymos, that tell us what is "the forum policy". We either accept it or GTFO.

Yeah, libertarian my ass. Someone needs to read some books by Prudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin or Rudolf Rocker. Maybe the guys in here read a couple of texts by Rothbard and think they understand what the word "libertarianism" means, but they are very mistaken.

You miss the point. No one is say what garr did was good other than some shareholders.

To get the tag here you have to do x or y.

People fail to understand that the word scammer here is not the same as many think.

This is not a democrazy the is the land ruled by theymos.

Im been way more than an ass here than i care to be just cuz i know theymos cant do shit and i question his moral ideas but it is his fucking forum with his rules.

Garr did not break the rules but yea what he did was wrong.

Thanks for that reply, pretty honest and pretty clear. I have to say I agree with many of your points, especially on the fact this is no "democracy" and much less a "libertarian community".

Wr have the forums we have, "it is what it is", but let us all debate to try to improve them.

I also agree on what you said about what Garr255 did, in my book that's very wrong too.

[Darktongue]

Yeah it was wrong theymos even said it. But its not pirateatfourty or matthew wrong.

To get the tag here you have to be one of the lowest.

Garr will pay for this more than people think and for him to get the tag it fould be a fail. Just look at how bitcoinica was defended or why its ok mt gox wont give us our coins back.

E^This /close thread

[starsoccer9]

I was recently contacted by Garr to remove my negative trust rating for him.  I declined, based on the "could have lost" clause.  I would recommend the original two highest bidders to consider this action.

I agree that trust takes a lifetime to build, and only a few posts to obliterate.

I agree thats a very good and true quote

[boonies4u]

I was recently contacted by Garr to remove my negative trust rating for him.  I declined, based on the "could have lost" clause.  I would recommend the original two highest bidders to consider this action.

I agree that trust takes a lifetime to build, and only a few posts to obliterate.

I agree thats a very good and true quote

I agree. He never did the full refund thing like i joked about or did the im under age so no contract is even valid card. Garr in all of this was more of a man about than just about all of us would have been.

He said he fucked up and paid for it when he could have got out of it.

Let's make sure he has to work real hard to get the chance to pull this shit off again.

[ThatDGuy]

I was recently contacted by Garr to remove my negative trust rating for him.  I declined, based on the "could have lost" clause.  I would recommend the original two highest bidders to consider this action.

I agree that trust takes a lifetime to build, and only a few posts to obliterate.

I agree thats a very good and true quote

I agree. He never did the full refund thing like i joked about or did the im under age so no contract is even valid card. Garr in all of this was more of a man about than just about all of us would have been.

He said he fucked up and paid for it when he could have got out of it.

While it was good that he came out with it, there was no way he would have gotten out of it.  The evidence was all over and Theymos could have confirmed Garr was Werner, just as Theymos quickly noted that Garr wasn't svbeon.

[pikeadz]

I would also add that how we handle situations like this could quite possibly determine the future of bitcoin commerce.  We can either blow this off as a single disruption that is harmless, or we can unite against scams like these and make an example of them.  As one person has already said, if behavior like this is tolerated, who would ever feel comfortable bidding on an auction in this forum again?  

Bitcoin is rife with scams.  Let's not continue to tolerate it with faulty logic like "oh it happens all the time.  Why are you surprised?"  How about people start getting pissed about it, shunning those that do it, and start trying to make this a better place so people can conduct commerce fairly.  It's not just for our benefit, but for those who may get involved in bitcoin in the future.  It benefits all of us to see people like this publicly shamed (and I'm not talking about the way Inaba did it... I mean the RIGHT way with a scammer tag or some objective method).

The news for you would be that:

A. Nothing happening on this forum has any impact on Bitcoin anything, be it finance, commerce or etcetera.

B. Nothing a user registered a coupla months ago has to say carries any weight or importance.

Yes, I get it, you love the concept and wish to change the world. Good for you.

Fortunately, length of time on a forum is not tantamount to credibility, which you make the point nicely.  I don't think you get it.  But it doesn't matter because there is power in numbers, and there are many more here that do get it.

[boonies4u]

Let's make sure he has to work real hard to get the chance to pull this shit off again.

to hold an auction?  yeah that will be hard

To hold a successful auction.

[boonies4u]

and to even have a clue here you need to have invested 20,000 plus hours and millions of dollars worth of BTC.

What?

[kibblesnbits]

Let's make sure he has to work real hard to get the chance to pull this shit off again.

to hold an auction?  yeah that will be hard

To hold a successful auction.

Garr forced people to pay a price people were happy to pay. free market wins, people wanted a "deal" did not get it and are fucking shitting themselvez cuz some guy on the internet "tricked" them.

face palm for just about everyone in this thread other than the people who said, yeah garr fucked up but its not the end of the world. he apoligized and paid out so let us move on.

Two very easy solutions:  no sock puppet bidding, auctioneers use a reserve price.



I was debating on auctioning off my SC Single.  In your logic, I could set it up, let people bid, then have my sock send the bid up to 1000BTC in the last few seconds.  Maybe someone would be desperate enough to outbid me (doubtful).  I win my own auction every single time until I get the price I want.  Why have the auction in the first place?  The entire auction process becomes a giant circle-jerk where the auctioneer sets the price, not the bidders.  That's not how an auction works.

Edit : Garr should have set a reserve price instead of the sock shill

[Plazmotech]

Had Garr255 warned people he could manipulate the prices would you still participate in the auction? After all, Garr255 has a right to sell his products for whatever price he would like to, and might've just been using the initial "auction" as a way to gauge the demand for the chip, and then set a price he would be willing to sell at.

Is that a rhetorical question, and if not, what would the answer change?  If i came to a shillathon, my buying strategy would certainly differ from that of a real auction.  I'd still show up & see how desperate the seller is to sell, but i wouldn't "bid"   Perhaps if i knew the seller was gauging the market, i'd bring 10 shills of my own & troll the price up absurdly high, just to get the seller to overstock & be forced to sell at a loss

You evil, evil genius.

[Nightowlace]

circle-jerk

[kibblesnbits]

Let's make sure he has to work real hard to get the chance to pull this shit off again.

to hold an auction?  yeah that will be hard

To hold a successful auction.

Garr forced people to pay a price people were happy to pay. free market wins, people wanted a "deal" did not get it and are fucking shitting themselvez cuz some guy on the internet "tricked" them.

face palm for just about everyone in this thread other than the people who said, yeah garr fucked up but its not the end of the world. he apoligized and paid out so let us move on.

Garr should have set a reserve price instead of the sock shill. 

Two very easy solutions:  no sock puppet bidding, auctioneers use a reserve price.

I was debating on auctioning off my SC Single.  In your logic, I could set it up, let people bid, then have my sock send the bid up to 1000BTC in the last few seconds.  Maybe someone would be desperate enough to outbid me (doubtful).  I win my own auction every single time until I get the price I want.  Why have the auction in the first place?  The entire auction process becomes a giant circle-jerk where the auctioneer sets the price, not the bidders.  That's not how an auction works.

They guy is a child who cant even hold legal binding auctions. And you are bitching he broke some rules some of you thought were real but theymos said were not?

WTF?

Then he certainly isn't old enough to run Cognitive and he double certainly shouldn't be holding onto 250BTC of forum funds.  Which is it?

[crumbs]