Someone lowered my trust, I don't know why. What recourse?

[zackclark70]

what I would like to know is how you linked those account names on coinchat  to this username on bitcointalk  

was it with his ip address ?

I know you have used an exploit in the past to access the forum admin panel ....

I *did* use coinchat a few months ago and I was banned by "admin".  We exchanged some emails in which I asked him what I had done to be banned and I didn't ever get a detailed response.

Here you go.

yes he know he said that but how did you know to give him negative feedback when he hadn't said that when you gave it to him  ?

until he posted this thread you had no way of knowing it was the same person

[1714961006]

1714961006

[1714961006]

1714961006

[1714961006]

1714961006

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

yes he know he said that but how did you know to give him negative feedback when he hadn't said that when you gave it to him  ?

until he posted this thread you had no way of knowing it was the same person

I think it's entirely reasonable that someone using the same uncommon username on two services can be assumed as the same user, especially given this:

Welcome!  I used to hang out a bit on coinchat as well.  It was fun.

[r3wt]

I think it's entirely reasonable that someone using the same uncommon username on two services can be assumed as the same user, especially given this:

quoting for posterity. remember how i signedup with "Nimda" at coinchat and you thought there was relation to "nimda" here? just because the odds are low doesn't eliminate the doubt. the user kosmo kramer here? i know a guy on a local sports message board that goes by the same name. my point is people see cool usernames and copy them other places. it happens.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

quoting for posterity. remember how i signedup with "Nimda" at coinchat and you thought there was relation to "nimda" here? just because the odds are low doesn't eliminate the doubt. the user kosmo kramer here? i know a guy on a local sports message board that goes by the same name. my point is people see cool usernames and copy them other places. it happens.

Yeah, that does happen, however in that case there was a mistake which would be corrected as soon as it was explained. But nimda (reverse of admin) isn't as uncommon as tspacepilot.

[r3wt]

quoting for posterity. remember how i signedup with "Nimda" at coinchat and you thought there was relation to "nimda" here? just because the odds are low doesn't eliminate the doubt. the user kosmo kramer here? i know a guy on a local sports message board that goes by the same name. my point is people see cool usernames and copy them other places. it happens.

Yeah, that does happen, however in that case there was a mistake which would be corrected as soon as it was explained. But nimda (reverse of admin) isn't as uncommon as tspacepilot.

like i said you have apoint, but lets give the guy a chance to prove it. maybe disclose ips and compare. if he can offer know no real evidence, then we can conclude he is in fact a liar. fair enough?

eh on second thought,  i don't even care. you handle your affairs however you see fit. none of my business.

[tspacepilot]

I'm glad that tradefortress has at least piped up to defend his outlandish actions.

I appreciate that others are also speaking up, it makes me feel like there's at least some sort moderation/arbitration going on here.  It seems, however, that this thread has gotten a little off topic.  I don't see why the odds of 'tspacepilot' as a user name come to bear on these facts:

1) tradefortress runs a site that gives out bitcoins for chatting
2) he's upset that tspacepilot didn't chat according to his "rules"

  (aside: i'd go into the fact that i wasn't producing spam, i was chatting legitmately (according to how I understood the system at the time) but I think it would be yet another distraction.  are the actions of chatters on a third party site really relevant to marketplace trust on bitcointalk.org)

3) he's decided that banning me from his coinchat isn't enough.  he wants to attack me on bitcointalk by asserting that he had "risked" 1.5 btc on me.
4) he's now admitted that he hasn't "risked" anything on me, that in fact he simply believes me to be a former user of his chat site with whom he is unhappy.
5) he's now changed his "risked" amount to be something closer to what he believes I cashed from his site (again, I might dispute this number but I think it's not actually relevant).

Isn't it obvious that any former usage of coinchat.org is in no way relevant to marketplace trust on bitcointalk.org?  Like I said, I haven't bought or sold any bitcoins in my life, but should I decide to do so, I don't believe it's fair to be penalized in this community because admin/tradefortress is upset about the results of his own site.

Please, community members, let me know what's relevant here?  As far as I can see, this is an angry bitcoin mogul who's feeling vindictive because I cashed out more than he wanted from his site which gives out free bitcoins for chatting.   Now he's going to do his best to smear me on the internet anywhere he sees me, no matter the relevance.

[r3wt]

  (aside: i'd go into the fact that i wasn't producing spam, i was chatting legitmately (according to how I understood the system at the time) but I think it would be yet another distraction.  are the actions of chatters on a third party site really relevant to marketplace trust on bitcointalk.org)

this point has been brought up before. he can't control his emotions and it has cost him his default trust. lots of people claim he is a scammer... i think he just can't afford to run coinchat tbh and would rather ban people here and there to get by.

[tspacepilot]

Hi tspacepilot aka wikib0t aka testycat aka newman aka manny on Coinchat,

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there.  I was sad to get kicked off because I had a lot of fun chatting there and gambling on the various robots.   What I can't understand is how a site that gives money for chatting is going to cry 'fraud'  when I took money for chatting.  I mean, the site gave me money and I cashed it out using the site's system.  How on earth is that fraudulent?  Another thing I can't understand is how the 0.2 he asked me for (and I'm still not sure where he got that number) has now inflated to 1.5BTC.

Excuse the language but bullshit.

Ok?

You were using a bot to send automated messages on coinchat and reaping the rewards fraudulently.

I was using a script (that you helped me make) which was experimenting with reading wikipedia articles, I was trying to turn this into a question answering machine.

You know that is against the rules. Nobody with any intelligence will think it is OK to run a bot to spam coinchat and get rewards. Bots are not allowed to earn rewards, bot accounts must have the name b0t in them and you've tried wikib0t. You've also said you "reviewed the rules" through email on Aug 30 and then tried wikib0t.

Actually, I didn't get to review the rules until after you banned me.  I asked for them several times before that though.

I have zero interest in wasting time with spammers who try to lawyer their way out.

It might help for you to review the wikipedia article on spam [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_(electronic) ].  The accepted definition seems to revolve around sending unsolicited bulk messages.  I don't know why you think that my script to answer wikipedia questions qualifies as spam.  Also, thanks for your interest measurement, I'd say that I have zero interest in being falsely attacked by a bitcoin mogul who has demonstrated a surprising amount of interest in going after a little guy on a bitcoin discussion forum.

If an ATM gives you money you shouldn't have got, legally you're in the wrong.

So, your coinchat site is an ATM?  And your use of the adverb "legally" suggests that you believe there's some relevant law here?   I'm sorry to say, man, I didn't sign any TOS when I joined coinchat.  I had a good time chatting and making friends until you kicked me off.  Ask around on your own site, tspacepilot was helpful and fun.  And I was having a pleasant time here too until you started putting fire up my ass.  If you have something better to do, then why not go on and do it?

[r3wt]

Hi tspacepilot aka wikib0t aka testycat aka newman aka manny on Coinchat,

The best guess I have at what he was angry about is that I was experimenting with robots on his site using the api the he published (and I as I understood it) he encouraged us to use.  I enjoyed coinchat and I learned a lot about node.js while I was experimenting there.  I was sad to get kicked off because I had a lot of fun chatting there and gambling on the various robots.   What I can't understand is how a site that gives money for chatting is going to cry 'fraud'  when I took money for chatting.  I mean, the site gave me money and I cashed it out using the site's system.  How on earth is that fraudulent?  Another thing I can't understand is how the 0.2 he asked me for (and I'm still not sure where he got that number) has now inflated to 1.5BTC.

Excuse the language but bullshit.

Ok?

You were using a bot to send automated messages on coinchat and reaping the rewards fraudulently.

I was using a script (that you helped me make) which was experimenting with reading wikipedia articles, I was trying to turn this into a question answering machine.

You know that is against the rules. Nobody with any intelligence will think it is OK to run a bot to spam coinchat and get rewards. Bots are not allowed to earn rewards, bot accounts must have the name b0t in them and you've tried wikib0t. You've also said you "reviewed the rules" through email on Aug 30 and then tried wikib0t.

Actually, I didn't get to review the rules until after you banned me.  I asked for them several times before that though.

I have zero interest in wasting time with spammers who try to lawyer their way out.

It might help for you to review the wikipedia article on spam [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_(electronic) ].  The accepted definition seems to revolve around sending unsolicited bulk messages.  I don't know why you think that my script to answer wikipedia questions qualifies as spam.  Also, thanks for your interest measurement, I'd say that I have zero interest in being falsely attacked by a bitcoin mogul who has demonstrated a surprising amount of interest in going after a little guy on a bitcoin discussion forum.

If an ATM gives you money you shouldn't have got, legally you're in the wrong.

So, your coinchat site is an ATM?  And your use of the adverb "legally" suggests that you believe there's some relevant law here?   I'm sorry to say, man, I didn't sign any TOS when I joined coinchat.  I had a good time chatting and making friends until you kicked me off.  Ask around on your own site, tspacepilot was helpful and fun.  And I was having a pleasant time here too until you started putting fire up my ass.  If you have something better to do, then why not go on and do it?

wait a damn minute s o youwere using a bought to make btc chatting  and don't understand why you were banned?  maybe because thats completely uneffin fair. 

[Mitchell]

You don't have to sign a ToS for it to be active. Using the service means that you agree with the ToS. Damn, how can someone be so ignorant as you?
You spammed with a bot to get BTC and now TF wants it back. Sounds legit and logical to me.

My 2 cents.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

You were using a bot to send automated messages on coinchat and reaping the rewards fraudulently.
I was using a script (that you helped me make) which was experimenting with reading wikipedia articles, I was trying to turn this into a question answering machine.

No you weren't, you were spamming irrelevant things in your own private room. Your excuse doesn't cut it.

wait a damn minute s o youwere using a bought to make btc chatting  and don't understand why you were banned?  Cry maybe because thats completely uneffin fair.  Roll Eyes

lol

1) tradefortress runs a site that gives out bitcoins for chatting
2) he's upset that tspacepilot didn't chat according to his "rules"

I do give out free Bitcoins for chatting. A bot talking to itself is not chatting. You're not allowed to run bots unless your account has the substring bot in it - and before you get smartass-y, "bot" not "b0t".

[tspacepilot]

1) tradefortress gives out coins for chatting on his site
2) he thinks i didnt follow rules there
3) he says, 'hay, i wish i hadnt given you so much btc for chatting on my site'
4) he invents an amount and accuses me of taking it from him on the bitcointalk marketplace where i have never traded

This is fair?

[tspacepilot]

wait a damn minute s o youwere using a bought to make btc chatting  and don't understand why you were banned?  maybe because thats completely uneffin fair. 

Actaully that's not my complaint at all. I figure whoever runs coinchat has the right to run it as they see fit. 

My complaint is that a guy who gave out btc for chatting on his site now accuses me of stealing from him on a market I've never even used.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

1) tradefortress gives out coins for chatting on his site
2) he thinks i didnt follow rules there
3) he says, 'hay, i wish i hadnt given you so much btc for chatting on my site'
4) he invents an amount and accuses me of taking it from him on the bitcointalk marketplace where i have never traded

This is fair?

1) A bot emitting messages to itself is not chatting.
2) The rules required bots to have the substring bot in it. This prevents it from getting rewards. Not knowing the rules is not an excuse. Keep in mind this forum has no defined rules.
3) Correct, as you have abused the service and defrauded coinchat.
4) From my read over the marketplace trust topic, it was named marketplace trust because it is visible in marketplace sections only, not that it was exclusively for deals conducted in the marketplace. If this is incorrect, some moderators have already violated the policy by leaving negative trust for activities not carried out in the marketplace. There's also quite a few trust ratings left for IRC / OTC trades.

Regardless, you have defrauded coinchat 0.5 or so BTC which was the amount you withdrew.

[tspacepilot]

You don't have to sign a ToS for it to be active. Using the service means that you agree with the ToS. Damn, how can someone be so ignorant as you?
You spammed with a bot to get BTC and now TF wants it back. Sounds legit and logical to me.

My 2 cents.

So your world works like this: a faucet gives you money for watching an ad.  You take the money.  A few months later the faucet owner finds you on bitcointalk and says: "hey I just found out that you weren't even watching the ad, you were making sandwhiches in the kitchen when the ad was playing.  This is fraud and you owe me three times the amount of money that you got from my faucet."  The faucet owner lowers your bitcointalk trust and calls you a spammer.  This is fair and right?

[tspacepilot]

1) tradefortress gives out coins for chatting on his site
2) he thinks i didnt follow rules there
3) he says, 'hay, i wish i hadnt given you so much btc for chatting on my site'
4) he invents an amount and accuses me of taking it from him on the bitcointalk marketplace where i have never traded

This is fair?

1) A bot emitting messages to itself is not chatting.
2) The rules required bots to have the substring bot in it. This prevents it from getting rewards. Not knowing the rules is not an excuse. Keep in mind this forum has no defined rules.
3) Correct, as you have abused the service and defrauded coinchat.
4) From my read over the marketplace trust topic, it was named marketplace trust because it is visible in marketplace sections only, not that it was exclusively for deals conducted in the marketplace. If this is incorrect, some moderators have already violated the policy by leaving negative trust for activities not carried out in the marketplace. There's also quite a few trust ratings left for IRC / OTC trades.

Regardless, you have defrauded coinchat 0.5 or so BTC which was the amount you withdrew.

1) I am a human, not a bot.
2) Again, I am a human, not a bot.
3) 'fraud' entails some relevant law (please cite one)
4) mods please weigh in on whether actions on coinchat have bearing on bitcointalk marketplace trust.  Tf, please provide evidence that i entered into some currency trade agreement with you anywhere.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

You don't have to sign a ToS for it to be active. Using the service means that you agree with the ToS. Damn, how can someone be so ignorant as you?
You spammed with a bot to get BTC and now TF wants it back. Sounds legit and logical to me.

My 2 cents.

So your world works like this: a faucet gives you money for watching an ad.  You take the money.  A few months later the faucet owner finds you on bitcointalk and says: "hey I just found out that you weren't even watching the ad, you were making sandwhiches in the kitchen when the ad was playing.  This is fraud and you owe me three times the amount of money that you got from my faucet."  The faucet owner lowers your bitcointalk trust and calls you a spammer.  This is fair and right?

A better example would be using a python script to watch the ad 10000 times with a proxy list. You get banned, the owner emails and explains to you that you cannot use a not, and you do it again.

You owe me half a Bitcoin, 1.5 BTC was an estimated amount (which is not that far off when looking at how much the average user owns). I have updated the risked amount to the correct sum.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

1) tradefortress gives out coins for chatting on his site
2) he thinks i didnt follow rules there
3) he says, 'hay, i wish i hadnt given you so much btc for chatting on my site'
4) he invents an amount and accuses me of taking it from him on the bitcointalk marketplace where i have never traded

This is fair?

1) A bot emitting messages to itself is not chatting.
2) The rules required bots to have the substring bot in it. This prevents it from getting rewards. Not knowing the rules is not an excuse. Keep in mind this forum has no defined rules.
3) Correct, as you have abused the service and defrauded coinchat.
4) From my read over the marketplace trust topic, it was named marketplace trust because it is visible in marketplace sections only, not that it was exclusively for deals conducted in the marketplace. If this is incorrect, some moderators have already violated the policy by leaving negative trust for activities not carried out in the marketplace. There's also quite a few trust ratings left for IRC / OTC trades.

Regardless, you have defrauded coinchat 0.5 or so BTC which was the amount you withdrew.

1) I am a human, not a bot.
2) Again, I am a human, not a bot.
3) 'fraud' entails some relevant law (please cite one)
4) mods please weigh in on whether actions on coinchat have bearing on bitcointalk marketplace trust.  Tf, please provide evidence that i entered into some currency trade agreement with you anywhere.

Are you now disputing that you have used automated or scripted mechanisms of emitting messages on coinchat which were fraudulently eligible for rewards intended for productive chatter?

We are not talking in the namespace of law. Pick up a dictionary and read up the definition of fraud. If you would like me to cite a relevant law, the CFAA forbids unauthorized access to protected interstate communications computers. Your first ban was an indication that you were no longer authorized to use the services provided by coinchat, however I am not interested in talking about legal matters or the CFAA.

[tspacepilot]

You don't have to sign a ToS for it to be active. Using the service means that you agree with the ToS. Damn, how can someone be so ignorant as you?
You spammed with a bot to get BTC and now TF wants it back. Sounds legit and logical to me.

My 2 cents.

So your world works like this: a faucet gives you money for watching an ad.  You take the money.  A few months later the faucet owner finds you on bitcointalk and says: "hey I just found out that you weren't even watching the ad, you were making sandwhiches in the kitchen when the ad was playing.  This is fraud and you owe me three times the amount of money that you got from my faucet."  The faucet owner lowers your bitcointalk trust and calls you a spammer.  This is fair and right?

A better example would be using a python script to watch the ad 10000 times with a proxy list.

You owe me half a Bitcoin, 1.5 BTC was an estimated amount (which is not that far off when looking at how much the average user owns). I have updated the risked amount to the correct sum.

This is unhelpful and outlandish. Provide some evidence as to where you get these numbers and how they are in any way relevant to a currency trade on bitcointalk.  If you assert that you 'risked .5 btc on me', what were you expecting in return?  Where did I agree to this?

For pairity, Ill go ahead and arbitrarily assert that I risked 1.5 btc on you when I joined bitcointalk. If you complain, I'll lower it to the 'correct sum' of .5btc.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Please respond to my previous post first. Do you dispute my allegation you have botted? In addition, do you dispute that it was made clear to you in writing (email) that (I) you were banned from coinchat and (ii) bot activity must be done under an account with the substring bot?

We must proceed this way if you are interested in lawyering your way around instead of having a normal discussion. A common trick used is to switch the topic to something that would invoke responses from the other party once the subject matter on hand is uncomfortable to you. Unfortunately, I am not falling for it.