Gleb Gamow account was sold Proof

[bigmelons25]

Bruno Is a good person and I hope we can put this problem behind us.

[1715245545]

1715245545

[1715245545]

1715245545

[1715245545]

1715245545

[LoyceV]

You should post this on the Reputation board. Even better, add it to this thread: Gleb Gamow account sold or hacked?.

I'll quote you there.

I suggest you have Global Moderator hilariousandco confirm the PM is real. I think it would work if you click "Report to Admin" from the PM, and choose hilariousandco (he opened the thread on this subject). Type the reason with your report.

[hilariousandco]

Please report the PM to me.

[Steamtyme]

I was wondering could you post up the whole convo?

It might be nice to see where it started and how it progressed to a potential account sale.

Maybe just put it all in the thread LoyceV linked.

[Gleb Gamow]

Here we go again. Do I need to take another selfie with a shoe on my head in proving that I have control of this user account?

Bruno

PS: Again, feel free to call me at 702-981-5600, the phone number that's been in my control from day one and associated with this user account.

[tmfp]

Here we go again. Do I need to take another selfie with a shoe on my head in proving that I have control of this user account?

Bruno

Hey Bruno, why do you never leave any feedback with that account?

[hilariousandco]

Here we go again. Do I need to take another selfie with a shoe on my head in proving that I have control of this user account?

Bruno

PS: Again, feel free to call me at 702-981-5600, the phone number that's been in my control from day one and associated with this user account.

This doesn't mean the account hasn't changed hands. Can you explain this:

[Quickseller]

I don’t think this is proof the account was sold, it is fairly good evidence it is for sale though.

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns? 

[Welsh]

It's already been verified by Hilariousandco:

Op sent me the PM so I can confirm that's real at least.

Gleb verified himself after the PM in OP. Thus I'd say it's reasonable to assume they are still in control of their account.

I don't think he is. Whoever bought the account probably just asked him to send some proof to get out of the mess. Either way I don't really trust Gleb.

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns?  

Judging by the message, and the supplied information it has already been sold  Otherwise, why would the PM be within the time frame of the password changes[1], and Gleb was likely willing to verify that he was still in control to protect the buyer.

Figure 1:

Quoting from seclog:

May 24, 2018, 08:19:02 PM - Gleb Gamow - password changed
May 24, 2018, 08:46:24 PM - Gleb Gamow - password changed
May 24, 2018, 10:40:27 PM - Gleb Gamow - password reset via email
May 26, 2018, 06:42:21 AM - Gleb Gamow - password reset via email
June 04, 2018, 01:44:22 AM - Gleb Gamow - password changed

And according to their trust page:

"This user's email address was changed recently."

Timestamp of the PM screenshot is right after the first password reset.

[pugman]

I don’t think this is proof the account was sold, it is fairly good evidence it is for sale though.

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns? 

If that is truly the case, I am sure a few users would help him out to give/lend him some money?
Chances are two people have access to Gleb Gamow/Bruno's account because of this, I have never seen Gleb post like this.

[Quickseller]

I don’t think this is proof the account was sold, it is fairly good evidence it is for sale though.

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns?  

If that is truly the case, I am sure a few users would help him out to give/lend him some money?

He is trying to sell his account, not borrow against it, so he may not be in a position to repay what is given to him (IDK). Are you willing to contribute to the cause?

(ignoring the fact that begging is not allowed here) would you like it if you were asked for money by long standing members?

[cryptohunter]

One of the most known and most respected accounts on the entire board.

Nobody can sniff out and prove a scam like gleb. It would be pretty easy to test out if it was the real gleb or not. Also most people know what he looks like so a photo with a shoe on the head would be then end of the matter


 

[Gleb Gamow]

It's already been verified by Hilariousandco:

Op sent me the PM so I can confirm that's real at least.

Gleb verified himself after the PM in OP. Thus I'd say it's reasonable to assume they are still in control of their account.

I don't think he is. Whoever bought the account probably just asked him to send some proof to get out of the mess. Either way I don't really trust Gleb.

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns?  

Judging by the message, and the supplied information it has already been sold  Otherwise, why would the PM be within the time frame of the password changes, and Gleb was likely willing to verify that he was still in control to protect the buyer.

Can somebody kindly explain to me what crime I commented in not being trusted anybody while still being instrumental in scam busting in protecting the crypto community as I've done on my own fuckin dime over the pass several years, turning down all those offering to tip me for my services. Now, if you can get one ... JUST ONE ... person to claim and prove beyond doubt that I have indeed accepted a tip for said services, then I will exit this space in a heartbeat. Needless to say, such is/was not the case.

[Gleb Gamow]

Here's one of the red trust comments ...

Bought account, trying to get into garbage posting business with a DT account.

I give, what the fuck is a DT account?

[pugman]

He is trying to sell his account, not borrow against it, so he may not be in a position to repay what is given to him (IDK). Are you willing to contribute to the cause?

(ignoring the fact that begging is not allowed here) would you like it if you were asked for money by long standing members?

I might. It depends on the circumstance. If the amount is really big, and if not many people decide to help, I might not be able to , because I won't just give a large amount of money to a person who I don't know at all.

Can somebody kindly explain to me what crime I commented in not being trusted anybody while still being instrumental in scam busting in protecting the crypto community as I've done on my own fuckin dime over the pass several years, turning down all those offering to tip me for my services. Now, if you can get one ... JUST ONE ... person to claim and prove beyond doubt that I have indeed accepted a tip for said services, then I will exit this space in a heartbeat. Needless to say, such is/was not the case.

Everything is against you right now, unfortunately. The password and email changes, the PM to bigmelons25 and also this sudden post change etc has made people believe that your account is compromised.

Here's one of the red trust comments ...

Bought account, trying to get into garbage posting business with a DT account.

I give, what the fuck is a DT account?

Ah, that is digaran, you can just ignore him. I find it weird that you don't know what a DT account is.

[Gleb Gamow]

He is trying to sell his account, not borrow against it, so he may not be in a position to repay what is given to him (IDK). Are you willing to contribute to the cause?

(ignoring the fact that begging is not allowed here) would you like it if you were asked for money by long standing members?

I might. It depends on the circumstance. If the amount is really big, and if not many people decide to help, I might not be able to , because I won't just give a large amount of money to a person who I don't know at all.

Can somebody kindly explain to me what crime I commented in not being trusted anybody while still being instrumental in scam busting in protecting the crypto community as I've done on my own fuckin dime over the pass several years, turning down all those offering to tip me for my services. Now, if you can get one ... JUST ONE ... person to claim and prove beyond doubt that I have indeed accepted a tip for said services, then I will exit this space in a heartbeat. Needless to say, such is/was not the case.

Everything is against you right now, unfortunately. The password and email changes, the PM to bigmelons25 and also this sudden post change etc has made people believe that your account is compromised.

Here's one of the red trust comments ...

Bought account, trying to get into garbage posting business with a DT account.

I give, what the fuck is a DT account?

Ah, that is digaran, you can just ignore him. I find it weird that you don't know what a DT account is.

Sorry for sounding weird, but I truly don't know what a DT account is. Please enlighten me.

Bruno

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

[Quickseller]

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns? 

Judging by the message, and the supplied information it has already been sold  Otherwise, why would the PM be within the time frame of the password changes[1], and Gleb was likely willing to verify that he was still in control to protect the buyer.

I would say there is a fairly decent chance it was sold, buy maybe not. The password changes indicate it likely changed hands, however the PM was sent after most of the changes. I don't think the password would change until after the account was sold, and I think these types of PMs would stop once the account was sold.

The only other explanation I can think of is the account sold to someone, and the buyer was trying to flip it.

[Welsh]

Can somebody kindly explain to me what crime I commented in not being trusted anybody while still being instrumental in scam busting in protecting the crypto community as I've done on my own fuckin dime over the pass several years, turning down all those offering to tip me for my services. Now, if you can get one ... JUST ONE ... person to claim and prove beyond doubt that I have indeed accepted a tip for said services, then I will exit this space in a heartbeat. Needless to say, such is/was not the case.

You haven't committed any crime, and no one is challenging the fact that this account has contributed a lot to the scam busting scene, and occasionally giving us readers a laugh. This isn't what we are challenging. We are challenging that the account has likely been exchanged given the evidence which has been verified to at least exist.

Therefore, if it has exchanged hands then all previous work done by the account just isn't valid anymore due to the fact that it's no longer the same person behind it. It's just another person using the integrity of the account as a mask.

We believed you with the evidence of the photo before, and I think we were all willing to let it die, but with the newly presented evidence it does look like you were willing to cover for the potential buyer, and post a photo, and verify it with a phone call too. At least this is what it looks like from the outside.

I was fan of you too yeah you trolled a little bit, but you really did look out for the community. Something just doesn't add up to me, why would you first be willing to sell the account, and why now. Also, if you have sold the account why on earth would you go to the lengths of verify that your still in control for them.

Would you be able to explain what possessed you to send that message? It's not like your a new member that doesn't know how much the account means to the community.

[Quickseller]

He is trying to sell his account, not borrow against it, so he may not be in a position to repay what is given to him (IDK). Are you willing to contribute to the cause?

(ignoring the fact that begging is not allowed here) would you like it if you were asked for money by long standing members?

I might. It depends on the circumstance. If the amount is really big, and if not many people decide to help, I might not be able to , because I won't just give a large amount of money to a person who I don't know at all.

It looks like he was asking for about $600.

If you were going to help, would you be okay with the fact that he has a valuable asset that he has not yet sold?

[pugman]

Sorry for sounding weird, but I truly don't know what a DT account is. Please enlighten me.

Bruno

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

Read this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=211858.msg2221664#msg2221664

DT stands for Default Trust and you have the power to give positive or negative trust to people. Bruno, are you seriously in need of money?

He is trying to sell his account, not borrow against it, so he may not be in a position to repay what is given to him (IDK). Are you willing to contribute to the cause?

(ignoring the fact that begging is not allowed here) would you like it if you were asked for money by long standing members?

I might. It depends on the circumstance. If the amount is really big, and if not many people decide to help, I might not be able to , because I won't just give a large amount of money to a person who I don't know at all.

It looks like he was asking for about $600.

If you were going to help, would you be okay with the fact that he has a valuable asset that he has not yet sold?

And that asset would be his account? I won't be able to pay 600$ as a whole, obviously not. I can make a small contribution to it. Again it depends on the circumstance, I am not guaranteeing anything.

[hilariousetc]

If Gleb needed money he could have just joined a signature campaign or asked for a loan. It would be interesting to know why he sold the account or if he just lost access to it somehow.

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

That's not sufficient proof that you are the original owner. All I think it is is that Bruno is still willing to provide this as proof so you don't get busted.

We believed you with the evidence of the photo before

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

[tmfp]

he has a valuable asset that he has not yet sold?

But it ceased to become a valuable asset when sold, or offered for sale.

[Welsh]

It's just strange I don't think he would of done it for money. AFAIK Gleb was invested in several different assets, and a few of them being altcoins. I think Gleb would of also known that he would of easily gotten a loan in the lending section on his reputation alone. I'm sure a few people would of done it without collateral or even taking the account as collateral just because of how well known it is, and on the assumption he wouldn't just give up an account like that for a mere 600.

I just can't get my head around this.

If Gleb needed money he could have just joined a signature campaign or asked for a loan. It would be interesting to know why he sold the account or if he just lost access to it somehow.

Yeah, and I think he would of done just that as he was aware of the earning capability with an account like his. I don't think he just lost access though as the phone number has been posted a few years ago, and he looks willing to verify it's him.

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Yeah, I think this was also mentioned in the thread that the poster was almost trying a little too hard to act like Gleb. I'll admit it I accepted it as proof just because at that time I trusted Glebs word.

[Gleb Gamow]

Bruno has contributed a fairly decent amount to the community over the years and based upon the fact he is (trying) to sell his accounts he likely is in need of money. So I would ask both hilarious and darkstar if they want to actively prevent Bruno from raising money he likely needs by selling something he duly owns? 

Judging by the message, and the supplied information it has already been sold  Otherwise, why would the PM be within the time frame of the password changes[1], and Gleb was likely willing to verify that he was still in control to protect the buyer.

I would say there is a fairly decent chance it was sold, buy maybe not. The password changes indicate it likely changed hands, however the PM was sent after most of the changes. I don't think the password would change until after the account was sold, and I think these types of PMs would stop once the account was sold.

The only other explanation I can think of is the account sold to someone, and the buyer was trying to flip it.

I have a theory. It hasn't changed hands whether it was for sale or not. But it's only a theory.  

If Gleb needed money he could have just joined a signature campaign or asked for a loan. It would be interesting to know why he sold the account or if he just lost access to it somehow.

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

That's not sufficient proof that you are the original owner. All I think it is is that Bruno is still willing to provide this as proof so you don't get busted.

We believed you with the evidence of the photo before

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Upon reviewing the prior owner's use of language, how's this: Me's love to go a goat fuckin.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to keep up between two threads that haz me on the edge of commenting suicide (see my suicide threads penned years ago if not versed).  

[Quickseller]

It's just strange I don't think he would of done it for money. AFAIK Gleb was invested in several different assets, and a few of them being altcoins. I think Gleb would of also known that he would of easily gotten a loan in the lending section on his reputation alone. I'm sure a few people would of done it without collateral or even taking the account as collateral just because of how well known it is, and on the assumption he wouldn't just give up an account like that for a mere 600.

I just can't get my head around this.

I know he is/was in a legal dispute with one of the scammers he bused several years ago, IIRC, it was with cyberpinoy. I vaguely remember something about claims of something along the lines of stalking (maybe his wife), that very well could have been dubious.

This could mean two things:
1, he could be trying to create doubt as to if he is really posting what is being said by the account in order to muddy the legal waters.
2, he could actually need the money as a result of his legal bills and potentially a judgement against him. As I previously mentioned, he may not be in a position to repay a loan (even though many would likely be lining up to lend to him). If he really needed the money, he may have chosen to sell his account to someone who understood what he was buying instead of entering into a transaction without the intention of holding up his end of the deal in order to get the $600

[Quickseller]

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

I spoke to Bruno and confirmed he in fact *not* sell his account. I confirmed the telephone number here, and he posted a picture while he was speaking with me. I can GPG sign something if necessary.

[Gleb Gamow]

I got lucky and when I was about to post the above, my phone rang. I easily guessed it was a Bitcoiner confirming my identity. I posted the image above while on the phone with him or her, though it sounded like a him but you can't be too sure of what's real or not in this space.  

Bruno

EDIT: Anybody wanna buy QS' phone number. (ONLY KIDDING)

[Steamtyme]

EDIT: Anybody wanna buy QS' phone number. (ONLY KIDDING)

That made me laugh, I like that you can keep your sense of humor about this.

Can you shed any light on the PM that was produced about selling the account?

Maybe you don't care and are just going to keep doin you; either way inquiring minds and what not.

[Gleb Gamow]

It's just strange I don't think he would of done it for money. AFAIK Gleb was invested in several different assets, and a few of them being altcoins. I think Gleb would of also known that he would of easily gotten a loan in the lending section on his reputation alone. I'm sure a few people would of done it without collateral or even taking the account as collateral just because of how well known it is, and on the assumption he wouldn't just give up an account like that for a mere 600.

I just can't get my head around this.

I know he is/was in a legal dispute with one of the scammers he bused several years ago, IIRC, it was with cyberpinoy. I vaguely remember something about claims of something along the lines of stalking (maybe his wife), that very well could have been dubious.

This could mean two things:
1, he could be trying to create doubt as to if he is really posting what is being said by the account in order to muddy the legal waters.
2, he could actually need the money as a result of his legal bills and potentially a judgement against him. As I previously mentioned, he may not be in a position to repay a loan (even though many would likely be lining up to lend to him). If he really needed the money, he may have chosen to sell his account to someone who understood what he was buying instead of entering into a transaction without the intention of holding up his end of the deal in order to get the $600

First off, thanks QS for verify me.

Secondly, I'm in no legal trouble whatsoever across the board, unless you consider having an SR22 for a traffic related issue that has nothing to do with being under the influence, for I don't partake, or, perhaps, Josh Zerlan still having a restraining order on my scammy ass because he fears for his life after I posted a pic of his master bath gleaned from the Net, uploaded years prior to him purchasing the infamous BTC-House.

Yes, I was contracted by the police to stop posting about Leroy Fodor and Bruce Peterson (BFL) but fuck them, given that enough time has passed since.

Again, it's ironic that the ONLY person sentenced for a crime related to BFL was me.

Bruno

EDIT: Anybody wanna buy QS' phone number. (ONLY KIDDING)

That made me laugh, I like that you can keep your sense of humor about this.

Can you shed any light on the PM that was produced about selling the account?

Maybe you don't care and are just going to keep doin you; either way inquiring minds and what not.

Yes I can shed some light on the matter. At one time it was for sale but no longer after finding out that such wasn't permitted in spite of believe such was, even posting such as proof. I was mistaken. I in no way wanted to get my cred in jeopardy while serving the community along with advancing my ICO.

[suchmoon]

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Sold it and then reclaimed? Thus multiple password changes.

Sold it to Quicksy with some sort of revenue sharing deal? Thus Quicksy so eager with proof.

Many possibilities but unless Gleb starts engaging in shady shit beyond sig campaigns I think I'll hold my judgement.

[hilariousetc]

I'll just leave this here:

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

That's not sufficient proof that you are the original owner. All I think it is is that Bruno is still willing to provide this as proof so you don't get busted.

Still doesn't explain this either:

EDIT: ONLY the Legendary user account is available with the other two being sold.

Selling PRIMO Legendary account.

Asking price is $600 obo via BTC, BCH or ETH. Includes 4 other good BCT user accounts you could use for sig campaigns, of which I've never participated in.

Leave message on this thread if you sent a PM inquiring. I'll be watching this thread with my other account(s).

sMerits available on three of the accounts. This is the only one that doesn't have any.

EDIT: $350 firm for just the Legendary account. Best act quickly before somebody else snatches up this primo account.

Also, it looks like The Pharmacist just tagged this account but the other accounts available are NOT tagged.

The account has almost certainly changed hands regardless of any pictorial or telephonic proof gleb wants to post.

Yes I can shed some light on the matter. At one time it was for sale but no longer after finding out that such wasn't permitted in spite of believe such was, even posting such as proof. I was mistaken. I in no way wanted to get my cred in jeopardy while serving the community along with advancing my ICO.

1) You've been here long enough to know how things work around here.
2) If that was the case, why did you use a throwaway account to sell it?

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Sold it and then reclaimed? Thus multiple password changes.

Sold it to Quicksy with some sort of revenue sharing deal? Thus Quicksy so eager with proof.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if QS was the one that bought it.

[pugman]

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Sold it and then reclaimed? Thus multiple password changes.

Sold it to Quicksy with some sort of revenue sharing deal? Thus Quicksy so eager with proof.

Many possibilities but unless Gleb starts engaging in shady shit beyond sig campaigns I think I'll hold my judgement.

I like this theory. Most of them in this thread were all boring but this is fired up crack( I DON'T TAKE DRUGS,FYI).  Can someone else call Gleb to verify if this theory is true or false?

[Gleb Gamow]

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Sold it and then reclaimed? Thus multiple password changes.

Sold it to Quicksy with some sort of revenue sharing deal? Thus Quicksy so eager with proof.

Many possibilities but unless Gleb starts engaging in shady shit beyond sig campaigns I think I'll hold my judgement.

I have no plans whatsoever in participating in any form of shady shit, bud ... unless it's with goat shit under a giant elm tree (read: in the shade).

[Welsh]

Yes I can shed some light on the matter. At one time it was for sale but no longer after finding out that such wasn't permitted in spite of believe such was, even posting such as proof. I was mistaken. I in no way wanted to get my cred in jeopardy while serving the community along with advancing my ICO.

If this was the case wouldn't you have tried selling the account as this account, and not some throw away?

I like this theory. Most of them in this thread were all boring but this is fired up crack( I DON'T TAKE DRUGS,FYI).  Can someone else call Gleb to verify if this theory is true or false?

Calling him is useless. It literally proves nothing other than he's willing to potentially protect the person who bought it by claiming he's still in control.

[Gleb Gamow]

I'll just leave this here:

PS: Will somebody fuckin call me at 702-981-5600 to confirm I am who I say I am.

That's not sufficient proof that you are the original owner. All I think it is is that Bruno is still willing to provide this as proof so you don't get busted.

Still doesn't explain this either:

EDIT: ONLY the Legendary user account is available with the other two being sold.

Selling PRIMO Legendary account.

Asking price is $600 obo via BTC, BCH or ETH. Includes 4 other good BCT user accounts you could use for sig campaigns, of which I've never participated in.

Leave message on this thread if you sent a PM inquiring. I'll be watching this thread with my other account(s).

sMerits available on three of the accounts. This is the only one that doesn't have any.

EDIT: $350 firm for just the Legendary account. Best act quickly before somebody else snatches up this primo account.

Also, it looks like The Pharmacist just tagged this account but the other accounts available are NOT tagged.

The account has almost certainly changed hands regardless of any pictorial or telephonic proof gleb wants to post.

Yes I can shed some light on the matter. At one time it was for sale but no longer after finding out that such wasn't permitted in spite of believe such was, even posting such as proof. I was mistaken. I in no way wanted to get my cred in jeopardy while serving the community along with advancing my ICO.

1) You've been here long enough to know how things work around here.
2) If that was the case, why did you use a throwaway account to sell it?

Something still seemed off to me. It's the posting/use of language that is different.

Sold it and then reclaimed? Thus multiple password changes.

Sold it to Quicksy with some sort of revenue sharing deal? Thus Quicksy so eager with proof.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if QS was the one that bought it.

Jesus fuckin Chris, bud, this is getting crazy now. QS only confirmed that I am who I say I am by calling me, but now we have him as the possible owner of the Gleb account.

Please refrain from stickin' it my ass by being straightforward with you.

Yes I can shed some light on the matter. At one time it was for sale but no longer after finding out that such wasn't permitted in spite of believe such was, even posting such as proof. I was mistaken. I in no way wanted to get my cred in jeopardy while serving the community along with advancing my ICO.

If this was the case wouldn't you have tried selling the account as this account, and not some throw away?

I like this theory. Most of them in this thread were all boring but this is fired up crack( I DON'T TAKE DRUGS,FYI).  Can someone else call Gleb to verify if this theory is true or false?

Calling him is useless. It literally proves nothing other than he's willing to potentially protect the person who bought it by claiming he's still in control.

I give. We could spend hours on this issue. Please let me know who I'm protecting. AND IT'S NOT QS.

[suchmoon]

I have no plans whatsoever in participating in any form of shady shit, bud ... unless it's with goat shit under a giant elm tree (read: in the shade).

You look and sound like good ol' Bruno, which is good enough for me.

Calling him is useless. It literally proves nothing other than he's willing to potentially protect the person who bought it by claiming he's still in control.

If Bruno and the hypothetical buyer are in cahoots then it's impossible to verify the ownership of the account in any conceivable way. Same applies to any account. So we are basically trying to come up with probabilities. I know I brought up the QS conspiracy theory but I think the probability of that one is quite low.

[Welsh]

I give. We could spend hours on this issue. Please let me know who I'm protecting. AND IT'S NOT QS.

I'm not going to go down the route of claiming it's QS, and I'll be honest I was hoping that this was a fake screenshot right from the beginning. However, you've got to consider how this looks on the outside. If you were relatively new to the forum, and tried selling your account a few years ago when it wasn't so documented that it was a pretty unacceptable thing then I don't think it would be an issue.

But, your account holds a certain respect. It's pretty well known by the majority of the members here, and I just don't think the original owner would not know it's unacceptable to sell an account after being part of the forum for all these years.

I don't want to believe your protecting the buyer, and I don't want to believe it's been sold. But, the fact that you sent that message, and  then there are multiple password changes in among all of this just doesn't seem right.

If Bruno and the hypothetical buyer are in cahoots then it's impossible to verify the ownership of the account in any conceivable way. Same applies to any account.

Yeah, and it's why I'm so conflicted about the issue. All we do know is the PM was sent, and there were password changes. I tend to steer away from pure speculation, but this kind of hits a nerve with me for what ever reason. I remember liking Bruno quite a bit.

Alright, it seems that Bruno has attempted to sell an account before (PG) back when it was an accepted thing to do. Maybe, it's not totally unbelievable that he wasn't aware it's not really accepted anymore.

Whoever is posted with the account right now definitely sounds like Bruno, and matches up with his previous posts. I find it hard to believe that someone who has bought the account would be nailing his language down to a T.

[Gleb Gamow]

I give. We could spend hours on this issue. Please let me know who I'm protecting. AND IT'S NOT QS.

I'm not going to go down the route of claiming it's QS, and I'll be honest I was hoping that this was a fake screenshot right from the beginning. However, you've got to consider how this looks on the outside. If you were relatively new to the forum, and tried selling your account a few years ago when it wasn't so documented that it was a pretty unacceptable thing then I don't think it would be an issue.

But, your account holds a certain respect. It's pretty well known by the majority of the members here, and I just don't think the original owner would not know it's unacceptable to sell an account after being part of the forum for all these years.

I don't want to believe your protecting the buyer, and I don't want to believe it's been sold. But, the fact that you sent that message, and  then there are multiple password changes in among all of this just doesn't seem right.

If Bruno and the hypothetical buyer are in cahoots then it's impossible to verify the ownership of the account in any conceivable way. Same applies to any account.

Yeah, and it's why I'm so conflicted about the issue. All we do know is the PM was sent, and there were password changes. I tend to steer away from pure speculation, but this kind of hits a nerve with me for what ever reason. I remember liking Bruno quite a bit.

Alright, it seems that Bruno has attempted to sell an account before (PG) back when it was an accepted thing to do. Maybe, it's not totally unbelievable that he wasn't aware it's not really accepted anymore.

Whoever is posted with the account right now definitely sounds like Bruno, and matches up with his previous posts. I find it hard to believe that someone who has bought the account would be nailing his language down to a T.

I could do the screenshot again with the same phone depicting its phone number - 702-981-5600. Give me a sec, bud. <need to fire up Photoshop  ; seriously, I'm not versed in PS, with the ONLY time I've altered a post was falsely depicting BitConnect's 24hr vol. via the Inspec thingy when you right click the moose thingy>

[Gleb Gamow]

Here's the pic as promised above ...

[BTCforJoe]

I haven't really paid any attention or crossed many paths with Gleb Gamow, but given the recent debacle related to his account, I developed a theory that was touched upon by @hilariousetc: that as part of the sale of this account, Gleb Gamow would provide proof anytime the validity of the account was questioned.

After reading this thread, however, this theory is starting to make less and less sense, unless the new owner of the account specifically asked Gleb to log in to clarify and address any doubts or suspicions.

As someone who knows how to use Photoshop and the "Inspect Element" tool in mozilla-based browsers, my first instinct to the screenshot that was provided by OP was that the text on-screen was customized (via inspector) before the screenshot was taken. If this is not the case, how come the message still hasn't been reported to a moderator so it could be verified?

Either way, I find this whole scenario highly amusing, so thanks for the entertainment. I honestly can't wait to see what outcome there is, if there even will be at all  

EDIT: nvm about the verification by hilariousandco, I just discovered the other thread.

[TryNinja]

If this is not the case, how come the message still hasn't been reported to a moderator so it could be verified?

It was. But in the other thread (which messed up everything).

Op sent me the PM so I can confirm that's real at least.

Gleb verified himself after the PM in OP. Thus I'd say it's reasonable to assume they are still in control of their account.

I don't think he is. Whoever bought the account probably just asked him to send some proof to get out of the mess. Either way I don't really trust Gleb.

[digaran]

@Gleb, please don't kill yourself man, world doesn't end here and now, I'm sure that we all could find a way to forgive you if you just honestly tell us the truth about the actual buyer. just tell us please and I will do whatever in my power to help you out.

[Gleb Gamow]

@Gleb, please don't kill yourself man, world doesn't end here and now, I'm sure that we all could find a way to forgive you if you just honestly tell us the truth about the actual buyer. just tell us please and I will do whatever in my power to help you out.

Seriously, dude, there's no real buyer. Please don't make me call Trump for a pardon. 

[Gleb Gamow]

I haven't really paid any attention or crossed many paths with Gleb Gamow, but given the recent debacle related to his account, I developed a theory that was touched upon by @hilariousetc: that as part of the sale of this account, Gleb Gamow would provide proof anytime the validity of the account was questioned.

After reading this thread, however, this theory is starting to make less and less sense, unless the new owner of the account specifically asked Gleb to log in to clarify and address any doubts or suspicions.

As someone who knows how to use Photoshop and the "Inspect Element" tool in mozilla-based browsers, my first instinct to the screenshot that was provided by OP was that the text on-screen was customized (via inspector) before the screenshot was taken. If this is not the case, how come the message still hasn't been reported to a moderator so it could be verified?

Either way, I find this whole scenario highly amusing, so thanks for the entertainment. I honestly can't wait to see what outcome there is, if there even will be at all  

EDIT: nvm about the verification by hilariousandco, I just discovered the other thread.

That image with me holding my cell phone depicting its phone number was uploaded quickly, thus no time to edit such even if I knew how to accomplish said feat on a phone. The following is the extent of my Photoshoping skills via the Inspect thingy ...

[BTCforJoe]

Dude, although we haven't crossed paths much, I will say that I've crossed your path enough to think that it's strange as fuck to see your posts with a paid signature underneath them and a paid personal message to the side... Just sayin'

[Gleb Gamow]

Dude, although we haven't crossed paths much, I will say that I've crossed your path enough to think that it's strange as fuck to see your posts with a paid signature underneath them and a paid personal message to the side... Just sayin'

Apologies for it being strange as fuck in trying to earn a couple bucks with the sig below after 100% declining ALL tips throughout the years offered to me in looking out for the community. As for the paid personal message on the side, dude, that's my entity. Fuck me! Is it okay for me to pay myself by endorsing my entity on the side or in the sig - which BTW I've done in the past - on this forum?

Let's say for sake of argument I'm between a rock and hard place. If so, is there any way possible you guys can kick me in my balls harder?

[suchmoon]

Let's say for sake of argument I'm between a rock and hard place. If so, is there any way possible you guys can kick me in my balls harder?

Can you post a picture? 

No, seriously, don't.

If you happen to see YuTü.Co.in please tell him to check his messages. Thx.

[Gleb Gamow]

Let's say for sake of argument I'm between a rock and hard place. If so, is there any way possible you guys can kick me in my balls harder?

Can you post a picture? 

No, seriously, don't.

If you happen to see YuTü.Co.in please tell him to check his messages. Thx.

Already on it, bud. I'm now Mick Fleetwood.  (with sigs removed)

Bruno

[suchmoon]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211050#msg40211050

[YuTü.Co.in]

Gleb Gamow account has been sold or the owner has attempted to sell. This account should have negative trust.  It's no coincidence this user has recently joined a paid signature campaign. I waited awhile for the account user to come clean but since he didn't I am posting the proof.

Not sure what you mean by come clean, but I am curious as to why you're not tagged yet for trying to purchase accounts.

Meanwhile, I went from green trust to red trust in a matter of hours after being accused of selling the Gleb account which wasn't sold, but is now in another's hands.

[Crypto_Sassy]

just wondering, if Hilariousandco can see the PM of  the user, then he can find from the AGLD pms, who bought this account?
Who are  the potential buyers of this account.
Should not we publish and red tag all the potential buyers of  this account, including OP?

[dbshck]

just wondering, if Hilariousandco can see the PM of  the user, then he can find from the AGLD pms, who bought this account?
Who are  the potential buyers of this account.
Should not we publish and red tag all the potential buyers of  this account, including OP?

AFAIK global mod can only see reported PM. theymos is the only person who's able to see all PMs.

[YuTü.Co.in]

just wondering, if Hilariousandco can see the PM of  the user, then he can find from the AGLD pms, who bought this account?
Who are  the potential buyers of this account.
Should not we publish and red tag all the potential buyers of  this account, including OP?

Whatever, dude.

Meanwhile, can I get some of my green trust back, for I've graduated from scambuster to thwarting an assignation attempt on the President of the United States by a user on this forum --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=317658.msg40216428#msg40216428 (read and follow the link to Meta).

Fuckin amazing that I went from the FBI used to call me for help pertaining to the blockchain before they developed a script to do what I used to do for free in outing out scammers, to earning green trust, to today having that turn red for something I didn't do, to now most likely having a Secret Service agent give me a call. I think it's time for bed, for it's been a long fuckin day.

Bruno

[hilariousetc]

Gleb Gamow account has been sold or the owner has attempted to sell. This account should have negative trust.  It's no coincidence this user has recently joined a paid signature campaign. I waited awhile for the account user to come clean but since he didn't I am posting the proof.

You still haven't explained this (though I guess there's nothing to explain as everyone can see what went on). Despite your protestations, you tried to sell the account, all the account's details then changed, you staked a new bitcoin address, then for the first time in your history here you try join the highest paid signature campaign on the forum.

I have no plans whatsoever in participating in any form of shady shit, bud ... unless it's with goat shit under a giant elm tree (read: in the shade).

You look and sound like good ol' Bruno, which is good enough for me.

He still sounds like someone pretending to be Bruno to me. Any long-time member knows how he acts around here and anyone who's at least half-intelligent could probably parody him successfully to some degree, though I admit he's doing a pretty good job, but something just seems off. Language is still a little different and out of the ordinary for me. Just seems like someone trying too hard to be him.

If Bruno and the hypothetical buyer are in cahoots then it's impossible to verify the ownership of the account in any conceivable way. Same applies to any account. So we are basically trying to come up with probabilities.

Well that's certainly why the feedback should stay, but I think it's safe to say the account did change hands and the proof is there that he at least tried to sell it so that warrants the feedback alone.

I know I brought up the QS conspiracy theory but I think the probability of that one is quite low.

I have no reason to believe QS does have it, but somebody does (or did).

[InvoKing]

Posting this mainly to keep following the topic
+
Can't theymos or Cyrus check the ip addresses? all the previous pms? Find a link between the reported accounts? It is better than speculating whether the account changed hands or not after being already tagged.
(and btw why is Phinnaeus Gage asleep from a +year?)

[hilariousandco]

They can, but they rarely get involved in these matters. Changing IPs isn't always conclusive proof either.

[suchmoon]

I know I brought up the QS conspiracy theory but I think the probability of that one is quite low.

I have no reason to believe QS does have it, but somebody does (or did).

That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259

So from my point of view the timeline is this:

1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account.
2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands.
2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so...
3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money.
4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue.
5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again.
6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly.

Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not.

Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you.

[digaran]

I know I brought up the QS conspiracy theory but I think the probability of that one is quite low.

I have no reason to believe QS does have it, but somebody does (or did).

That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259

So from my point of view the timeline is this:

1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account.
2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands.
2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so...
3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money.
4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue.
5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again.
6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly.

Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not.

Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you.

Quoting for future reference. so you bought an account and now expecting the red tags to be removed just because you bought the account?
Tagged.

[suchmoon]

Quoting for future reference. so you bought an account and now expecting the red tags to be removed just because you bought the account?
Tagged.

I don't particularly care either way. You missed the part where I said I'm not going to use the account and Bruno may get it back at some point so it doesn't make any difference to me though it probably does for Bruno. But if you want to keep lying and creating your own reality - be my guest

[jackg]

That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259

So from my point of view the timeline is this:

1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account.
2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands.
2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so...
3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money.
4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue.
5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again.
6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly.

Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not.

Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you.

How much did you give him for it if you're happy saying?

Also this is kinda sad that all these users accounts are changing hands since the time I've been here. It'd be nice if more people would just hold onto their accounts but sure, If people need the money then they can sell. Although, this is one of the more notable members so hopefully Bruno gets posession of his account once again!

I'm also curious as to whether this was because of the loan request he made in October/November (for 2BTC) or whether it's for something else he needed the money for, though I think that's a bit too intrusive. I'm not sure that loan request ever got filled, I knew that he didn't want to give the Gleb account then so something must really have hit him hard.

I'd also suggest that the negative tags on the Gleb account get changed to neutral and that they read that the account has been changed to be owned by Suchmoon.
@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

[digaran]

Quoting for future reference. so you bought an account and now expecting the red tags to be removed just because you bought the account?
Tagged.

I don't particularly care either way. You missed the part where I said I'm not going to use the account and Bruno may get it back at some point so it doesn't make any difference to me though it probably does for Bruno. But if you want to keep lying and creating your own reality - be my guest

Nothing is lost yet, if you admit what you did was wrong, I will give you another chance and would remove my tag. you could've paid him from your pocket without taking control of the account. it also seems that Bruno has been on account sale business for years. why did you take the account if you trusted him and even asked for his red tags to be removed? you didn't trust him enough that's why you tried to buy the account and make it look like you are helping him.

Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it. I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1?

[jackg]

Nothing is lost yet, if you admit what you did was wrong, I will give you another chance and would remove my tag. you could've paid him from your pocket without taking control of the account. it also seems that Bruno has been on account sale business for years. why did you take the account if you trusted him and even asked for his red tags to be removed? you didn't trust him enough that's why you tried to buy the account and make it look like you are helping him.

Why would they care to remove negative trust from you? You're negged yourself but DT members.
I don't think what they did is against anything.
And there is also irony in your post. Suchmoon said he isn't going to sell it on or use it (unless back to Bruno) so the account is now stagnant and won't continue to be sold.

Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it. I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1?

Blazed has a history of account sales afaik, it was on a thread somewhere (unless that's just Quicksy fud).
And those accounts/people should do what they seem fit to in response to this. I don't think either should really have much done differntly to them though.

[suchmoon]

How much did you give him for it if you're happy saying?

I don't want to get into the details without Bruno's permission but if he wants to share that info - I'm fine with it.

@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere.

Nothing is lost yet, if you admit what you did was wrong, I will give you another chance and would remove my tag. you could've paid him from your pocket without taking control of the account. it also seems that Bruno has been on account sale business for years. why did you take the account if you trusted him and even asked for his red tags to be removed? you didn't trust him enough that's why you tried to buy the account and make it look like you are helping him.

Not sure how to put this politely but I don't care about your red tag or what you think of this deal.

Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it. I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1?

Have you contacted the DT1 members yet?

This should be a good test of the rumor that Quicksy controls Tomatocage. I can't imagine him being happy with this so Gleb almost certainly will get dropped from DT2 if that's the case.

[jackg]

How much did you give him for it if you're happy saying?

I don't want to get into the details without Bruno's permission but if he wants to share that info - I'm fine with it.

Yeah, I expected that.
I just wanted to see if it was an amount fairly high currently ~1BTC+ to see if it was similar to that loan which, as I understand it, didn't get filled.

@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere.

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

Therefore I'd like to ask Tomatocage to exclude Gleb from DT2 before we see suchmoon to start tagging people with it. I would also like to ask Blazed and dooglus to exclude suchmoon from DT2, she is a blatant account buyer. unless Blazed and dooglus agree with suchmoon's actions? if they agree with such a blatant case of account trading maybe we need to ask theymos to exclude them from DT1?

Have you contacted the DT1 members yet?

This should be a good test of the rumor that Quicksy controls Tomatocage. I can't imagine him being happy with this so Gleb almost certainly will get dropped from DT2 if that's the case.

Is that some sort of reverse psychology

[suchmoon]

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

I never put any value on forum accounts. If I lose my account I'll just start over. Now having Gleb's account puts a bit more responsibility on me but maybe Bruno has a staked address on that one.

Is that some sort of reverse psychology

Shhh... don't tell Quicksy.

[InvoKing]

@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere.

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

Suchmoon has at least one old address 1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP (https://web.archive.org/web/20140403105622/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771), if you still have access to it you can sign a message with it...although I don't consider this mandatory.

[jackg]

Suchmoon has at least one old address 1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP (https://web.archive.org/web/20140403105622/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771), if you still have access to it you can sign a message with it...although I don't consider this mandatory.

That's a good idea invoking to find a staked address (I was going through their trust but couldn't find anything).

It would obviously be good if you could sign it Suchmoon however it definitley isn't mandetory (it just allows us to have a bit of a better reference). And means we don't have to depend on typed words for when the account goes back to Gleb - as there is then more proof that the account has left you.

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

I never put any value on forum accounts. If I lose my account I'll just start over. Now having Gleb's account puts a bit more responsibility on me but maybe Bruno has a staked address on that one.

I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have.
If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would.

[suchmoon]

@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere.

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

Suchmoon has at least one old address 1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP (https://web.archive.org/web/20140403105622/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771), if you still have access to it you can sign a message with it...although I don't consider this mandatory.

Nice job, thanks. I found it also posted in one of my threads:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=514242 (post has been edited but last edit was 3 years ago).

Message (one line):

This is suchmoon 2018-06-17. I control bitcointalk accounts "suchmoon" and (temporarily) "Gleb Gamow".

Signature:

HM71xTAaD8xyx7ciTaPTmKLBp7Y7Rzm9uQ5MIdhUJh6ZVUPtz2mAEsiyI/4BS5ZQVDnsSnHSWWBw4ur5UjzgxAU=

I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have.
If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would.

Well, I would obviously post a warning if I ever lose the account and would request it to be banned/removed from DT/red-tagged etc. But I hear what you're saying. Will fix that soon.

[InvoKing]

@Suchmoon, could you sign a message from a staked address from your suchmoon account to show that you own it?

I don't have a staked address as I never expected to be in this position. I'll see if I can find one posted somewhere.

Based on all the recent hacks why would you not have a staked address somewhere? I mean if either of those accounts now get compromised then you're stuck without them. I'd advse you stake one.

Suchmoon has at least one old address 1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP (https://web.archive.org/web/20140403105622/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771), if you still have access to it you can sign a message with it...although I don't consider this mandatory.

Nice job, thanks. I found it also posted in one of my threads:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=514242 (post has been edited but last edit was 3 years ago).

Message (one line):

This is suchmoon 2018-06-17. I control bitcointalk accounts "suchmoon" and (temporarily) "Gleb Gamow".

Signature:

HM71xTAaD8xyx7ciTaPTmKLBp7Y7Rzm9uQ5MIdhUJh6ZVUPtz2mAEsiyI/4BS5ZQVDnsSnHSWWBw4ur5UjzgxAU=

I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have.
If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would.

Well, I would obviously post a warning if I ever lose the account and would request it to be banned/removed from DT/red-tagged etc. But I hear what you're saying. Will fix that soon.

Quoting suchmoon post as it is and the message was successfully verified using http://brainwalletx.github.io/#verify?vrAddr=1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP&vrMsg=This%20is%20suchmoon%202018-06-17.%20I%20control%20bitcointalk%20accounts%20"suchmoon"%20and%20(temporarily)%20"Gleb%20Gamow".&vrSig=HM71xTAaD8xyx7ciTaPTmKLBp7Y7Rzm9uQ5MIdhUJh6ZVUPtz2mAEsiyI%2F4BS5ZQVDnsSnHSWWBw4ur5UjzgxAU%3D

[suchmoon]

Staked the address here as well:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg40261816#msg40261816

[jackg]

Suchmoon has at least one old address 1A8DePhATaFEyNBJpuybCA8oYUUZEgUraP (https://web.archive.org/web/20140403105622/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=234771), if you still have access to it you can sign a message with it...although I don't consider this mandatory.

Nice job, thanks. I found it also posted in one of my threads:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=514242 (post has been edited but last edit was 3 years ago).

Message (one line):

This is suchmoon 2018-06-17. I control bitcointalk accounts "suchmoon" and (temporarily) "Gleb Gamow".

Signature:

HM71xTAaD8xyx7ciTaPTmKLBp7Y7Rzm9uQ5MIdhUJh6ZVUPtz2mAEsiyI/4BS5ZQVDnsSnHSWWBw4ur5UjzgxAU=

Message verified using bitcoin core v0.16.0 (to add to what InvoKing said)

I don't think this is the attitude someone on DT should have.
If your account gets compromised then it's free to scam people out of anything. You might not put value on your own account, but someone else would.

Well, I would obviously post a warning if I ever lose the account and would request it to be banned/removed from DT/red-tagged etc. But I hear what you're saying. Will fix that soon.

Yes please do fix that asap.
Otherwise, when you report the account being hacked, most will think you're just a newbie who has a issue with you and won't do anything to act on changing your trust.

[digaran]

If I lose my account I'll just start over.

You'd start over perhaps you'd also ask Blazed and dooglus to include your new account on DT2 as well so that you could roam the forum and tag whomever you want, buy any account and expect us to trust you on your words.

[vit05]

just wondering, if Hilariousandco can see the PM of  the user, then he can find from the AGLD pms, who bought this account?
Who are  the potential buyers of this account.
Should not we publish and red tag all the potential buyers of  this account, including OP?

AFAIK global mod can only see reported PM. theymos is the only person who's able to see all PMs.

I did not know about it, although I knew that this functionality existed in such forums. Is it possible for him to use this function when he receives a request to rescue hacked or blocked accounts?
Is there any record of when the PM was viewed by a third account?

[digaran]

I did not know about it, although I knew that this functionality existed in such forums. Is it possible for him to use this function when he receives a request to rescue hacked or blocked accounts?
Is there any record of when the PM was viewed by a third account?

Only admin has access to PMs without anybody reporting them, global mods could only see a PM if you report the PM and select global mod as the viewer.
Please refrain from this kind of question asking on such topics.

[Lutpin]

That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259

So from my point of view the timeline is this:

1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account.
2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands.
2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so...
3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money.
4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue.
5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again.
6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly.

Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not.

Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you.

I've left a neutral tag refering to your post (and quoting it now for reference as well), contact me in case the situation changes in any way and I'll make sure to adjust my feedback based on the new situation.

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Gleb would never sell his account(s). Never.

Joking aside, the OP is an asshat. No proof.

[jackg]

Gleb would never sell his account(s). Never.

Joking aside, the OP is an asshat. No proof.

Errrr Read This:

That somebody right now is me and I'm quite confident I was dealing with Bruno:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211259#msg40211259

So from my point of view the timeline is this:

1) Bruno needs money, makes the ill-conceived decision to sell the Gleb Gamow account.
2) Some sales action takes place, including PMs, but I don't believe the account changes hands.
2a) I can't explain the changes in posting style though Bruno is known for elaborate trollery so...
3) Unable to sell the account Bruno enrolls in a sig campaign to make money.
4) PMs get published, Bruno gets red-tagged and loses campaign revenue.
5) I make an offer to prevent the account from falling into malicious hands should Bruno decide to sell it again.
6) Bruno takes me up on my offer and now I temporarily control the account. When/if Bruno gets it back I will state so publicly.

Even if I'm wrong about some part of this, the fact is the account is in my hands. I'm fully aware of the irony given my stance against account sales and sockpuppetry and the aforementioned impossibility of proving account ownership but I've already stated I won't be using it for anything so it will be really easy to see if I'm telling the truth or not.

Hopefully this puts an end to the drama. Given the circumstances it seemed to me like the best way out. I would appreciate if you could remove neg trust as I don't believe Bruno deserves it but that's really up to you.

[Leeroy Jenkins]

That isn't a sale. That's a rental/pawn. OP didn't post proof. That remains true.

[digaran]

That isn't a sale. That's a rental/pawn. OP didn't post proof. That remains true.

Yes that is a rental/pawn. alright.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4476580.0

[Lutpin]

Suchmoon should be given negative trust.  It is setting a dangerous precedent if we allow high ranked users to break the rules of this forum.

What's this "dangerous precedent" that is being set here?
Suchmoon offering to lend Bruno money for an indefinite amount of time, meanwhile securing the GG account, so it cannot be sold or used for any possibly malicious action, is that it?
The way I see it, suchmoon helped a bitcoiner in need and eliminated a possible risk with their decision.

If suchmoon uses the account in any way (be it signature campaigns, any other posting, trading, or in the worst case leaving feedback), then yes, this is a problematic situation that should be addressed.
But as long as suchmoon's control over the account simply means they are locking anyone else (either Bruno or a possible buyer) from using the account to cause harm, I do not see the problem/danger here.

[naturerock]

Suchmoon should be given negative trust.  It is setting a dangerous precedent if we allow high ranked users to break the rules of this forum.

What's this "dangerous precedent" that is being set here?
Suchmoon offering to lend Bruno money for an indefinite amount of time, meanwhile securing the GG account, so it cannot be sold or used for any possibly malicious action, is that it?
The way I see it, suchmoon helped a bitcoiner in need and eliminated a possible risk with their decision.

If suchmoon uses the account in any way (be it signature campaigns, any other posting, trading, or in the worst case leaving feedback), then yes, this is a problematic situation that should be addressed.
But as long as suchmoon's control over the account simply means they are locking anyone else (either Bruno or a possible buyer) from using the account to cause harm, I do not see the problem/danger here.

I'm fine with Gleb being helped out considering his contributions to this forum over the past few years.  I was reading  digaran's opinions on the situation and it does seem a bit unfair considering account buyers/ sellers always get tagged.

I suppose this isn't really an account sale considering the Gleb account won't be used in typical fashion of an account transfer.

I'm fine with account selling so I don't have a problem with it personally I was just going by the rules of this forum.

[digaran]

Let me say this now and here: if suchmoon agrees on locking the account, I will remove my red tag on him. lets be honest suchmoon has tried to help Gleb.
But she/he could've helped him simply by lending him the money, what suchmoon did was accepting a DT2 account as a sort of collateral, clearly suchmoon didn't trust Gleb enough. is that what suchmoon good for? to blatantly accept an account(DT2) as a collateral?

Lock the account and I will change my tag in to neutral because of whatever good suchmoon has done for the community. fair enough?

[pugman]

Let me say this now and here: if suchmoon agrees on locking the account, I will remove my red tag on him. lets be honest suchmoon has tried to help Gleb.
But she/he could've helped him simply by lending him the money, what suchmoon did was accepting a DT2 account as a sort of collateral, clearly suchmoon didn't trust Gleb enough. is that what suchmoon good for? to blatantly accept an account(DT2) as a collateral?

Lock the account and I will change my tag in to neutral because of whatever good suchmoon has done for the community. fair enough?

No one cares about your tag,bruh! And who are you talking to?

[LoyceV]

Let me say this now and here: if suchmoon agrees on locking the account, I will remove my red tag on him. lets be honest suchmoon has tried to help Gleb.
But she/he could've helped him simply by lending him the money, what suchmoon did was accepting a DT2 account as a sort of collateral, clearly suchmoon didn't trust Gleb enough. is that what suchmoon good for? to blatantly accept an account(DT2) as a collateral?

The way I see it, suchmoon offered this for 3 reasons:
1. Help Gleb out with $600
2. Prevent the account to be bought by someone else
3. Make your head explode

Let me go on the record to say that if Gleb ever needs $600 again I call dibs on his account just to prevent it from falling into wrong hands and to preserve its post history.

Let's watch digaran's head explode now.

I'd say all 3 goals have been reached!
I don't believe suchmoon had any other motive to "buy" the account, as it obviously has no monetary value to him.

[Jet Cash]

I think it is a shame that good members of the forum should have to lose the benefits of their previous support for the forum. Here is my suggestion for a possible solution that does not result in the transfer of the account, and its possible degredation as a result.

A respected member operates a signature rental business, and he can prepay for a 3 month ( say) rental to help to relieve immediate financial stress for the member with difficulties. The promoted products shoul not be bounty or airdrops, but should be reputable businesses. This will avoid the degredation of the members account. This will not be a loan, so as long as the member continues to contribute to the forum, he will not have to repay the advance.

[hilariousetc]

I think it is a shame that good members of the forum should have to lose the benefits of their previous support for the forum. Here is my suggestion for a possible solution that does not result in the transfer of the account, and its possible degredation as a result.

A respected member operates a signature rental business, and he can prepay for a 3 month ( say) rental to help to relieve immediate financial stress for the member with difficulties. The promoted products shoul not be bounty or airdrops, but should be reputable businesses. This will avoid the degredation of the members account. This will not be a loan, so as long as the member continues to contribute to the forum, he will not have to repay the advance.

"Good" members of the forum shouldn't be trying to sell their accounts for any reason even if they're desperate for money. People can use their rep for all types of nefarious activity because they have a certain amount of trust. This whole situation doesn't make any sense to me but it's clear that Gleb tried to sell the account or at the very least loan it out to someone, and my guess is someone gave him money to borrow it so they could try join Chipmixer. He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it, but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

[Welsh]

"Good" members of the forum shouldn't be trying to sell their accounts for any reason even if they're desperate for money. People can use their rep for all types of nefarious activity because they have a certain amount of trust. This whole situation doesn't make any sense to me but it's clear that Gleb tried to sell the account or at the very least loan it out to someone, and my guess is someone gave him money to borrow it so they could try join Chipmixer. He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it, but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

Maybe, Gleb thought he wouldn't be able to pay the loan. In this is right to assume at least he wasn't willing to borrow the money that he knew several members would be queuing up to give him, and then default on it.

[funsponge]

Everyone saying that every account selling accounts get tagged is wrong there is currently a legendary member trying to sell an account in the auction board but not one really cares about that because it's not someone who is as well known as Gleb.

I am not going to argue that the tag is not justified but to anyone claiming anyone would of got this treatment is wrong. Only The Pharmacist seems to be consistent in tagging people who sell accounts. Everyone else is just looking to slay a giant.

Here is the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4441505.0

[Jet Cash]

I don't approve of accounts being sold, especially with the advent of the merit system. Having said that, I'm not sure that an account should be red tagged just because it has been purchased.  I think some sort of alert stating that the acoount had changed hands might be more useful. Of course if the new owner abuses the account, then red tagging may be necessary. Also., I believe that positive trust should be reset to zero, as the trust referred to the previous owner.

This also raises the issue of business accounts. What happens if the business is sold, but the account remains within the business? Maybe that should be announced in reputation.

[TheQuin]

This also raises the issue of business accounts. What happens if the business is sold, but the account remains within the business? Maybe that should be announced in reputation.

The whole point of tagging purchased accounts is that the new owner is pretending to be someone they are not. Not just any trust ratings the account has but its whole posting history is someone else's.
In the case of a business changing hands, this doesn't apply as the account would still be the official voice of the company. As long as the fact that the business is under new ownership is public then there is no deception.

[LoyceV]

Everyone saying that every account selling accounts get tagged is wrong there is currently a legendary member trying to sell an account in the auction board but not one really cares about that because it's not someone who is as well known as Gleb.

The seller is known, the account to be sold is still unidentified.

I am not going to argue that the tag is not justified but to anyone claiming anyone would of got this treatment is wrong. Only The Pharmacist seems to be consistent in tagging people who sell accounts. Everyone else is just looking to slay a giant.

As much as I appreciate his consistency, I would argue there's a difference between a green trusted Legendary selling an account and a Newbie selling his dozens of farmed accounts. The latter is less likely to cause massive spam, although I think the account should have a neutral tag stating the date of the sale. But tagging sold accounts won't be possible as long as sellers are being tagged, and sales are an undergrounnd market.
If accounts sales would be public, the buyer would know his account will be scrutinized, and he'll have to be very careful not to spam from his "investment".

I'm not sure that an account should be red tagged just because it has been purchased.  I think some sort of alert stating that the acoount had changed hands might be more useful. Of course if the new owner abuses the account, then red tagging may be necessary. Also., I believe that positive trust should be reset to zero, as the trust referred to the previous owner.

That won't always work, as the accounts that left the positive trust may not even be active anymore.

Buying an account is like cheating the Activity and Merit systems, which were introduced to restrict the spamming capacity for new users.
Apart from the farmed spam accounts, I can think of arguments for both sides. Therefore I won't tag account sales myself, but I'll present evidence if I find it.

[jackg]

This also raises the issue of business accounts. What happens if the business is sold, but the account remains within the business? Maybe that should be announced in reputation.

The whole point of tagging purchased accounts is that the new owner is pretending to be someone they are not. Not just any trust ratings the account has but its whole posting history is someone else's.
In the case of a business changing hands, this doesn't apply as the account would still be the official voice of the company. As long as the fact that the business is under new ownership is public then there is no deception.

I'm not entirely sure about the business thing. If some of the staff/people with acces to it, remains the same then I don't think anything has changed too much. If the company get sold outright and the entire staff is changed then the account and business arguably should have their trust and history removed.
Otherwise it looks a lot like it's one rule for one and one rule for another...
Although, the same legal entity do technically own the account - a link to their business probile showing the change of the shareholders would be helpful in fully clarifying all of the information about the account.

That won't always work, as the accounts that left the positive trust may not even be active anymore.

Buying an account is like cheating the Activity and Merit systems, which were introduced to restrict the spamming capacity for new users.
Apart from the farmed spam accounts, I can think of arguments for both sides. Therefore I won't tag account sales myself, but I'll present evidence if I find it.

I think it would be nice to see that if an account is inactive for say a year and gets locked by the forum maybe due to it's inactivity, it should be moved down to DT4 so that there isn't a potential for any scams from the account (the history should remain and the trust level should be regained if the ownership of the account can be proven). I have seen a lot of users here that have positive ratings that have gone on to do immense scams and have retained that positive because the user who gave them a positive has not been online since just before they scammed.

@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow,  has the account gone back to Bruno?

[TheQuin]

arguably should have their trust and history removed.

I semi agree on this bit. I'd say that the people that left that trust should review it and decide if they still feel it is valid under the new owners.

What I was trying to get at is that it shouldn't be the default position that if a business gets sold that it should be tagged red simply because of that in the same way that a personal account would.

[funsponge]

As much as I appreciate his consistency, I would argue there's a difference between a green trusted Legendary selling an account and a Newbie selling his dozens of farmed accounts. The latter is less likely to cause massive spam, although I think the account should have a neutral tag stating the date of the sale. But tagging sold accounts won't be possible as long as sellers are being tagged, and sales are an undergrounnd market.
If accounts sales would be public, the buyer would know his account will be scrutinized, and he'll have to be very careful not to spam from his "investment".

I never considered this and I think thats a real good way of looking at it. Though should the seller release the information about the account they are selling? Otherwise they are protecting a sold account. If that is the case there is no difference between tagging sold accounts and the seller.

[suchmoon]

@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow,  has the account gone back to Bruno?

I have made only one post from that account to confirm that I control it:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211133#msg40211133

And have not used it since, nor will I. It has not gone back to Bruno.

[jackg]

@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow,  has the account gone back to Bruno?

I have made only one post from that account to confirm that I control it:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211133#msg40211133

And have not used it since, nor will I. It has not gone back to Bruno.

Ok that's good. I was considering you controlled it still and then checked back somewhere else and thought it went back to him but wasn't sure.

$600 was quite a small amount compared to the value of his account (though it already had negative trust so)... Quite fast to raise it also so that's good.

[Jet Cash]

It makes me wonder if I should monetise my accouint. I own the .com to go with it, so maybe I should start a new coin, or a fast exchange system.

[Flying Hellfish]

This whole situation doesn't make any sense to me but it's clear that Gleb tried to sell the account or at the very least loan it out to someone, and my guess is someone gave him money to borrow it so they could try join Chipmixer.

I can speculate and maybe add something here:

Bruno seems to be trying hard to move forward his yutucoin idea.  
I think he has figured out it isn't going very far with it with him at the helm flying solo.  I believe he thought bringing in an ICO consultant would be the best way to move the project forward.

ICO consultant cost money and maybe Bruno is unable to fund it himself.  He decides to run a pre-ICO to get enough funding to hire the ICO consultant and run an ICO for yutucoin.

Based on the traffic in the pre-ICO thread and the wallets listed I had not seen much support for his project other than myself and another unnamed user.  I think he didn't get the response he wanted and so decided another option to raise funds would be to join sig campaigns.

He applied to chipmixer and iirc he even mentioned he was raising funds for a project.  His ap was declined and he then applied for bitcloak (iirc) which again iirc was full so he didn't get in.  I didn't follow any other sig apps the gleb account made but I thought he was in another one at least before all this went down.

If I am correct Bruno is now not getting much support from his pre-ICO nor able to monetize his sig space and is still wanting (needing?) to raise money.  

The next decision is to sell the gleb account.  This is where he gets fucking stupid IMO.  You can't argue Bruno didn't try to sell the gleb account, the facts are there.  Selling a DT account privately has way to much abuse potential, that's a fact.

I am not sure at this point it the account passed hands or not (before Suchmoon stepped in and helped diffuse the situation).  I am also not sure if he is "protecting" the buyer and those 2 points still trouble me a bit personally.

Now I will fully admit and have wondered if Bruno made up the whole yutucoin pre-ICO to just make some money to live?  I made up my mind that wasn't the case I actually think he believes in his idea and I sent him a couple hundreds bucks, I'm ok with the gamble!  IF I've been scammed well lesson learned!

"He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it

Perhaps (I say perhaps because I can't speak for Bruno obviously) he didn't want to ask for another loan (he had at least one outstanding to DS) and perhaps he wanted to ask for support in his own way ie launching his pre-ICO instead of asking loan?  If he actually believes in yutucoin he may have thought offering an early bonus for supporting him may be better for everyone than another loan?  Perhaps the sig campaign joining and gleb account sale was another alternative to taking another loan.

On the flip side perhaps Bruno had much more nefarious intentions after all.  Perhaps he is tired of the community or in personal trouble we don't know about.  Maybe he thought he could leverage his notoriety here and whip up a pre-ICO and grab XXX money because he's desperate.  When that didn't go so well he needed money and went to rent or sell his gleb account.

I think it's clear which way I think it went but I will also admit that I would not be comfortable risking anymore than I already have at this point and time.  I'm not in any way arguing what he did (ie trying to sell his gleb account, especially secretly) was smart or right.  I think it was stupid.  

I really don't want to try to speak for Bruno nor am I defending what he did but perhaps I have presented something else to consider in this mess!

I am very happy Suchmoon stepped in and provided at least some temporary situational grounding!

[funsponge]

Suchmoon did the right thing in my opinion and I think it goes to show the trustworthiness that Gleb shown to give it to suchmoon.

@Suchmoon, stop using Gleb's account if you want to keep his posts true to him there is no point in posting with it.
I'm very slow,  has the account gone back to Bruno?

I have made only one post from that account to confirm that I control it:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2544574.msg40211133#msg40211133

And have not used it since, nor will I. It has not gone back to Bruno.

Ok that's good. I was considering you controlled it still and then checked back somewhere else and thought it went back to him but wasn't sure.

$600 was quite a small amount compared to the value of his account (though it already had negative trust so)... Quite fast to raise it also so that's good.

I do not see why the amount received or quoted has any factor in any of this. If it was sold for $1 or $10000 it would not matter.

[Quickseller]

This also raises the issue of business accounts. What happens if the business is sold, but the account remains within the business? Maybe that should be announced in reputation.

The whole point of tagging purchased accounts is that the new owner is pretending to be someone they are not. Not just any trust ratings the account has but its whole posting history is someone else's.
In the case of a business changing hands, this doesn't apply as the account would still be the official voice of the company. As long as the fact that the business is under new ownership is public then there is no deception.

I'm not entirely sure about the business thing. If some of the staff/people with acces to it, remains the same then I don't think anything has changed too much. If the company get sold outright and the entire staff is changed then the account and business arguably should have their trust and history removed.
Otherwise it looks a lot like it's one rule for one and one rule for another...
Although, the same legal entity do technically own the account - a link to their business probile showing the change of the shareholders would be helpful in fully clarifying all of the information about the account.

What if one of the staff gets fired and the business hires someone else to handle whatever the account was handling?

The identities of owners are generally private information (although they are sometimes voluntarily made public for a variety of reasons). If I am understanding you correctly, you believe this should be made public? 

[Quickseller]

He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it,

I think it is pretty clear Bruno is not interested in repaying the $600 he was trying to get for his account, hence he listed it for sale.

The notion that someone should take out a loan they have no interest in repaying should be condemned. The same is true for those who lack the ability to repay a loan.

but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

If you can sell an account for $600 but can only borrow $400 against it's reputation, it would be irrational for the buyer to buy the account and subsequently take out a loan he has no intent on repaying.

A healthy and transparent market would make it easier for lenders to judge how much it would be safe to trust an account with via a no-collateral loan.

[jackg]

He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it,

I think it is pretty clear Bruno is not interested in repaying the $600 he was trying to get for his account, hence he listed it for sale.

The notion that someone should take out a loan they have no interest in repaying should be condemned. The same is true for those who lack the ability to repay a loan.

Well that's wrong, Bruno has already paid back suchmoon.

but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

If you can sell an account for $600 but can only borrow $400 against it's reputation, it would be irrational for the buyer to buy the account and subsequently take out a loan he has no intent on repaying.

A healthy and transparent market would make it easier for lenders to judge how much it would be safe to trust an account with via a no-collateral loan.

[/quote]
You should already be able to predict the value for youself and set limits on what you'd lend to specific lenders based on their reputation(I have mine).

What if one of the staff gets fired and the business hires someone else to handle whatever the account was handling?

The identities of owners are generally private information (although they are sometimes voluntarily made public for a variety of reasons). If I am understanding you correctly, you believe this should be made public? 

If I make an account and make a PLC, LLC or LTD company, I have to list myself as the owner of the company. My account can then be traced back to that company and therefore someone can find all the shareholders/owners/directors of that company. That information is already public knowledge so you may as well link it to the account.

And NO, if the primary account holder (the CEO) changes, then it should be stated publicly somewhere - even if just a way to advertise the company as there's another thread with your company's name on it.

[hilariousetc]

He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it,

I think it is pretty clear Bruno is not interested in repaying the $600 he was trying to get for his account, hence he listed it for sale.

The notion that someone should take out a loan they have no interest in repaying should be condemned. The same is true for those who lack the ability to repay a loan.

Well that's wrong, Bruno has already paid back suchmoon.

He hasn't paid Darkstar back yet and I think QS is right on this one. Gleb clearly doesn't care about his accounts that much because he has a history of taking loans out on them and also not paying them back. The fact that he would try sell or borrow based on them and for so little says a lot about him to be honest and that's behaviour that I can't trust.

[suchmoon]

He could have just asked for a loan if he needed money and someone would have likely given him it,

I think it is pretty clear Bruno is not interested in repaying the $600 he was trying to get for his account, hence he listed it for sale.

The notion that someone should take out a loan they have no interest in repaying should be condemned. The same is true for those who lack the ability to repay a loan.

Well that's wrong, Bruno has already paid back suchmoon.

No he hasn't, I already replied to you on that subject, not sure why you keep repeating that?

Quicksy can't miss an opportunity to shill for account sales LOL.

[YuTü.Co.in]

Amazingly, all this started because I attempted to sell an account but changed my mind opting to go another route. Madness!

[pixie85]

Amazingly, all this started because I attempted to sell an account but changed my mind opting to go another route. Madness!

I guess people are afraid of trusted accounts getting into the wrong hands and we can't blame them. If your account got sold without anyone knowing about it, it could cause huge mess. Especially since nowadays painting someone red equals instant loss of payment and campaign spot if a person involved in paid posting.

[Quickseller]

but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

If you can sell an account for $600 but can only borrow $400 against it's reputation, it would be irrational for the buyer to buy the account and subsequently take out a loan he has no intent on repaying.

A healthy and transparent market would make it easier for lenders to judge how much it would be safe to trust an account with via a no-collateral loan.

You should already be able to predict the value for youself and set limits on what you'd lend to specific lenders based on their reputation(I have mine).

You may or may not be correct in the limits you set. Your limits may be too high, and you have simply been lucky in terms of your loan losses, or they may be too low, and you are missing out on potential interest income.

Other lenders may not come to the same conclusions as you have, and may not have sufficient information to be comfortable lending any amount without collateral.

I am fairly confident that accounts are still being traded, it is only that they are being done in a blackmarket type setting and prices are not public. Making this information public would give lenders additional data points when deciding to make a loan.

What if one of the staff gets fired and the business hires someone else to handle whatever the account was handling?

The identities of owners are generally private information (although they are sometimes voluntarily made public for a variety of reasons). If I am understanding you correctly, you believe this should be made public?  

If I make an account and make a PLC, LLC or LTD company, I have to list myself as the owner of the company. My account can then be traced back to that company and therefore someone can find all the shareholders/owners/directors of that company. That information is already public knowledge so you may as well link it to the account.

Why don't you tell me where I can find the names of the shareholders and directors of PrimeDice and Bitstamp LTD?

Before you spend too much time looking, I will start by telling you this information is not public, although some companies may choose to make some of it public.

And NO, if the primary account holder (the CEO) changes, then it should be stated publicly somewhere - even if just a way to advertise the company as there's another thread with your company's name on it.

Much of the time, the company account will not be used by the CEO. If you look at NitrogenSports's account, you will see it is clearly run by a team of customer service reps. Often times, business accounts are run by fairly low level employees, and their employment status is similarly often not public information.

Gleb clearly doesn't care about his accounts that much because he has a history of taking loans out on them and also not paying them back. The fact that he would try sell or borrow based on them and for so little says a lot about him to be honest and that's behaviour that I can't trust.

I can't speak to Bruno's situation specifically, as I do not know the underlying facts that caused him to sell his account. However, hypothetically speaking, if someone lost their job and is in need of money to pay rent, and to buy food, what would you suggest they do? Not everyone is fortunate enough to have a job, and government welfare programs will generally not cover the bills of someone who is unemployed, and especially will not do so indefinitely.

[jackg]

but this is exactly the issue because the same would still apply after the account changes hands and why it could have easily been abused.

If you can sell an account for $600 but can only borrow $400 against it's reputation, it would be irrational for the buyer to buy the account and subsequently take out a loan he has no intent on repaying.

A healthy and transparent market would make it easier for lenders to judge how much it would be safe to trust an account with via a no-collateral loan.

You should already be able to predict the value for youself and set limits on what you'd lend to specific lenders based on their reputation(I have mine).

You may or may not be correct in the limits you set. Your limits may be too high, and you have simply been lucky in terms of your loan losses, or they may be too low, and you are missing out on potential interest income.

Other lenders may not come to the same conclusions as you have, and may not have sufficient information to be comfortable lending any amount without collateral.

I am fairly confident that accounts are still being traded, it is only that they are being done in a blackmarket type setting and prices are not public. Making this information public would give lenders additional data points when deciding to make a loan.

What if one of the staff gets fired and the business hires someone else to handle whatever the account was handling?

The identities of owners are generally private information (although they are sometimes voluntarily made public for a variety of reasons). If I am understanding you correctly, you believe this should be made public? 

If I make an account and make a PLC, LLC or LTD company, I have to list myself as the owner of the company. My account can then be traced back to that company and therefore someone can find all the shareholders/owners/directors of that company. That information is already public knowledge so you may as well link it to the account.

Why don't you tell me where I can find the names of the shareholders and directors of PrimeDice and Bitstamp LTD?

Before you spend too much time looking, I will start by telling you this information is not public, although some companies may choose to make some of it public.

And NO, if the primary account holder (the CEO) changes, then it should be stated publicly somewhere - even if just a way to advertise the company as there's another thread with your company's name on it.

Much of the time, the company account will not be used by the CEO. If you look at NitrogenSports's account, you will see it is clearly run by a team of customer service reps. Often times, business accounts are run by fairly low level employees, and their employment status is similarly often not public information.

The CEO will be keeping an eye on how the employees use the account though.
The owner of primedice afaik is stunna, I'm not sure whether primedice is an incorporated entity and by business, I meant Incorporated entity. If you could find the documents to state this?

And I think I am pricing them a bit low but that makes the loan more secure. I also base my predicted amount on how much I know a user, for example, I increased my limit for a member of this forum a while back and he repayed me back - with a bit of a delay though but I still got everything back.


Sorry suchmoon, I read your post wrong earlier.

[suchmoon]

Sorry suchmoon, I read your post wrong earlier.

No problem, that's what I figured. Gleb Gamow account is still in my control until I say otherwise

[digaran]

No problem, that's what I figured. Gleb Gamow account is still in my control until I say otherwise

Good luck with getting your money back and good luck with having Gleb's negative trusts to be removed.  
BTW, I got tagged by don hilary's alt after I followed his example, I got triggered by his thread about Gleb changing email and pass so I posted a thread about marlboroza changing email, and don hilary tagged me. thanks don, remember you inspired me to go down that path.

[suchmoon]

No problem, that's what I figured. Gleb Gamow account is still in my control until I say otherwise

Good luck with getting your money back and good luck with having Gleb's negative trusts to be removed.  

You seem to be far more concerned about that than I am. It's unhealthy, give it up, move on to your next drama.

[Quickseller]

The CEO will be keeping an eye on how the employees use the account though.
The owner of primedice afaik is stunna, I'm not sure whether primedice is an incorporated entity and by business, I meant Incorporated entity. If you could find the documents to state this?

And I think I am pricing them a bit low but that makes the loan more secure. I also base my predicted amount on how much I know a user, for example, I increased my limit for a member of this forum a while back and he repayed me back - with a bit of a delay though but I still got everything back.

I am fairly certain that primedice is incorporated somewhere, I want to say Costa Rica, but I am not 100% sure. I do know that stunna is one of the owners but is not the only owner, and am fairly certain he is not even a majority owner. PD recently got a new CEO.

Bitstamp is an incorporated entity, specifically the name of the entity is "Bitstamp LTD" but I can assure you there is not public information about who its shareholders are, who ultimately make high level decisions regarding the business.

I have no idea if it you are appropriately pricing your loans, however as I previously said, if you are offering too small of loans, then you are missing out on interest income. I would find it hard to believe that, as a lender, you would not want to know what accounts are selling for so you can have more information about how much to lend to a particular user, and so a user who cannot repay what he is borrowing knows he has an alternative to taking out a loan from you. 

[suchmoon]

Bitstamp is an incorporated entity, specifically the name of the entity is "Bitstamp LTD" but I can assure you there is not public information about who its shareholders are, who ultimately make high level decisions regarding the business.

It's completely off topic as is your blatant shilling for account sales, but maybe this will make you go away:

[vit05]

Bitstamp is an incorporated entity, specifically the name of the entity is "Bitstamp LTD" but I can assure you there is not public information about who its shareholders are, who ultimately make high level decisions regarding the business.

It's completely off topic as is your blatant shilling for account sales, but maybe this will make you go away:

And the CEO has a negative Trust in BitcoinTalk.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=38966

[jackg]

The CEO will be keeping an eye on how the employees use the account though.
The owner of primedice afaik is stunna, I'm not sure whether primedice is an incorporated entity and by business, I meant Incorporated entity. If you could find the documents to state this?

And I think I am pricing them a bit low but that makes the loan more secure. I also base my predicted amount on how much I know a user, for example, I increased my limit for a member of this forum a while back and he repayed me back - with a bit of a delay though but I still got everything back.

I am fairly certain that primedice is incorporated somewhere, I want to say Costa Rica, but I am not 100% sure. I do know that stunna is one of the owners but is not the only owner, and am fairly certain he is not even a majority owner. PD recently got a new CEO.

Bitstamp is an incorporated entity, specifically the name of the entity is "Bitstamp LTD" but I can assure you there is not public information about who its shareholders are, who ultimately make high level decisions regarding the business.

I have no idea if it you are appropriately pricing your loans, however as I previously said, if you are offering too small of loans, then you are missing out on interest income. I would find it hard to believe that, as a lender, you would not want to know what accounts are selling for so you can have more information about how much to lend to a particular user, and so a user who cannot repay what he is borrowing knows he has an alternative to taking out a loan from you. 

You're missing the point here. Every account is slightly differen, previous trades, posting style and the length the person has been here is all that I rely on.

Bitstamp is an incorporated entity, specifically the name of the entity is "Bitstamp LTD" but I can assure you there is not public information about who its shareholders are, who ultimately make high level decisions regarding the business.

It's completely off topic as is your blatant shilling for account sales, but maybe this will make you go away:

You can now disappear from here QS thanks to suchmoon's discovery.

[InvoKing]

A typical bitcointalk topic!
Hey digaran can't you offer a free service to Gleb? (/s)
Time to lock maybe?

Edit :

Time to lock maybe?

This disucssion was over until you bumped it!

Do you think so? ok sorry SIR

[jackg]

A typical bitcointalk topic!
Hey digaran can't you offer a free service to Gleb? (/s)

We moved on to calming quickseller - away from digaran.

Time to lock maybe?

This disucssion was over until you bumped it!

[BTCforJoe]

Amazingly, all this started because I attempted to sell an account but changed my mind opting to go another route. Madness!

Is no one going to address this?

Bruno, the madness is that you never clearly explained what the situation was after this whole thing went down. You left it up for speculation, as can be seen in one of the multiple threads dedicated to this subject. You could have confirmed or denied any of the speculation, but you didn't; you posted a picture, which is good, but you still didn't address the hype while the hype was hyped. So, yeah. Madness.

[YuTü.Co.in]

Amazingly, all this started because I attempted to sell an account but changed my mind opting to go another route. Madness!

Is no one going to address this?

Bruno, the madness is that you never clearly explained what the situation was after this whole thing went down. You left it up for speculation, as can be seen in one of the multiple threads dedicated to this subject. You could have confirmed or denied any of the speculation, but you didn't; you posted a picture, which is good, but you still didn't address the hype while the hype was hyped. So, yeah. Madness.

I did confirm that the account was for sale at one time but nixxed that course of action with digaran insisting that I come clean as to who the buyer was when there wasn't one.

[digaran]

I did confirm that the account was for sale at one time but nixxed that course of action with digaran insisting that I come clean as to who the buyer was when there wasn't one.

Could you explain who was that garbage poster who posted with your account and tried to join chipmixer campaign with a non segwit address? you said on your AGLD account that you already sold a few low ranking accounts, who bought them? could you give us their names so that we could tag them as well? I am with second and third chances, I want to exonerate you the right way, confess to your past crimes and be free from all the charges.

If you never sold your account then why did you reset your password several times between the times of posting with AGLD account telling people that your legendary account was still available? why did you say that theymos helped you to get back your compromised accounts? did he really help you and without knowing it he also helped you to get back the accounts you sold already? or did you just lie to our faces?


Also I would like to ask you, what is your relationship with the fake Satoshi Craig Wright or whatever his name is? are you in bed with Bitcash cartel as well? these are the questions I like to know their answers.

[Lutpin]

Also I would like to ask you, what is your relationship with the fake Satoshi Craig Wright or whatever his name is? are you in bed with Bitcash cartel as well? these are the questions I like to know their answers.

Let me ask a few more questions here with equal relevance:
How many dates with a new partner do you wait before having sex with them? Did you vote for Hillary, Trump, or someone else in the last election? In your house, is the toilet paper roll hanging in the front or behind?
These are questions I really wouldn't like to know the answers to, but have as much to do with you attempting to sell your account than the two quoted above.

[ibminer]

Et tu, Bruno? 

[YuTü.Co.in]

I did confirm that the account was for sale at one time but nixxed that course of action with digaran insisting that I come clean as to who the buyer was when there wasn't one.

Could you explain who was that garbage poster who posted with your account and tried to join chipmixer campaign with a non segwit address? you said on your AGLD account that you already sold a few low ranking accounts, who bought them? could you give us their names so that we could tag them as well? I am with second and third chances, I want to exonerate you the right way, confess to your past crimes and be free from all the charges.

If you never sold your account then why did you reset your password several times between the times of posting with AGLD account telling people that your legendary account was still available? why did you say that theymos helped you to get back your compromised accounts? did he really help you and without knowing it he also helped you to get back the accounts you sold already? or did you just lie to our faces?


Also I would like to ask you, what is your relationship with the fake Satoshi Craig Wright or whatever his name is? are you in bed with Bitcash cartel as well? these are the questions I like to know their answers.

Wow! Like holy shit WOWWWWWWWWWWWWW !!! I haven't a clue as to how you figured out that I'm in bed with the Fake Satoshi Craig Wright. But given that you did, I think it's prudent that I come clean before digaran provides the proof as to who I really am.

I am theymos. Here's proof. My alt accounts under the nym Bruno and I both do the following ...

[mosprognoz]

Hey Bruno. How much you need to pay all your debts that are related to your account ? Do you remember that thread from Theymos regarding  new rank requirements (April Fools) ? There was a post that Gleb wins the award for best Bitcointalker overall! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3232693.msg33729235#msg33729235 I'm just interested if Bruno repays all his debts here, will DT members remove red tags from his profile and can we give that profile back to Bruno ?  

[YuTü.Co.in]

Hey Bruno. How much you need to pay all your debts that are related to your account ? Do you remember that thread from Theymos regarding  new rank requirements (April Fools) ? There was a post that Gleb wins the award for best Bitcointalker overall! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3232693.msg33729235#msg33729235 I'm just interested if Bruno repays all his debts here, will DT members remove red tags from his profile and can we give that profile back to Bruno ?  

I'm replying to mosprognoz's post publicly, opting to not PM him/her in the spirit of full transparency. Please contact DarkStar_ and suchmoon in learning what you seek.

I'm on record in stating that I've NEVER accepted a single satoshi for my efforts as a scam buster in this space over the course of seven-plus years. That said, I'm willing to consider such an outlay - if comes to fruition - the first time I've been compensated for said services which I truly have, and continue enjoying doing. Whether true or not, scam busting with the PG and GG user accounts may carry more weight needed to smack the side of heads of Investards ready to partake in obvious rogue crypto entities based solely on fluff, e.g. Arbitao, in citing such, ready to garner U$45M during its upcoming ICO.

Thanks for your support, mosprognoz, over and beyond any monetary actions which may or may not see light. Seriously, I'm cool either way.

Bruno

[Anduck]

Slightly offtopic:

It's quite sad to see these announcements how you've never accepted tips when people have wanted to tip you. Are you maybe trying to gain some legitimacy by stating it over and over around forums?

Now you're fooling idiots by offering them an ICO. This ICO would never get investments from the usual sources. Many in this community are greedy and make their own ICOs as they see the most shittiest ideas get millions in ICO funding. Last year some scammer took millions of $ worth of cryptos as "investments" by faking everything from promises to team, whole thing pulled on one single website and some marketing. Most of the ICOs are in the "waiting for delivery" phase now. Not many will deliver anything.

How is this behavior of being proud of humbly denying donations when people wanted to tip you for good deeds in line with this borderline-scamming ICO shit of yours?

[YuTü.Co.in]

Slightly offtopic:

It's quite sad to see these announcements how you've never accepted tips when people have wanted to tip you. Are you maybe trying to gain some legitimacy by stating it over and over around forums?

Now you're fooling idiots by offering them an ICO. This ICO would never get investments from the usual sources. Many in this community are greedy and make their own ICOs as they see the most shittiest ideas get millions in ICO funding. Last year some scammer took millions of $ worth of cryptos as "investments" by faking everything from promises to team, whole thing pulled on one single website and some marketing. Most of the ICOs are in the "waiting for delivery" phase now. Not many will deliver anything.

How is this behavior of being proud of humbly denying donations when people wanted to tip you for good deeds in line with this borderline-scamming ICO shit of yours?

I have no idea what the fuck you're talkin 'bout. Comparing apples to oranges much?

I simply stated a truism that I've never accepted a single satoshi for my scam busting efforts is all which has nothing to do with me attempting to scam the community with my shitty ICO.  

Please try harder to discredit my scammy ass. The community will appreciate it.

Meanwhile, this ... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4455437.msg40478623#msg40478623

Now kindly get the fuck outta my face until you reach such a level.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna start an auction where I have every intent on bidding on the item myself given that a Legendary member of this forum fully demonstrated that such is sanctioned. Yes, I satire much. I'm fuckin good at it. And FWIW, I've NEVER accepted a single satoshi for my satire prowess.

[digaran]

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna start an auction where I have every intent on bidding on the item myself given that a Legendary member of this forum fully demonstrated that such is sanctioned. Yes, I satire much.

You are excused, however what you need to know is that Anduck did such bidding on own auction 2 years ago and has never done such since. note that the same legendary who sanctioned such action as bidding on own auction is to be considered as scamming, went ahead and gave out positive trust for actmyname another legendary member who countered Vod's feedback on Anduck to give a free pass to a scammer according to Vod. also DarkStar_ who tagged you for an unpaid loan, has also handed out a positive trust to Anduck for no valid reason.

Back to topic, could you please clarify on the case where you said that you have already sold out a few accounts on your AGLD account? we still need their UIDs, why aren't you cooperating with us man?

Ignore the above statement and just give us one answer please: the UIDs of your sold accounts, because we need to see if what you have done could be fixed or not, more you keep quiet the more you'll lose your credibility here.
Why didn't you ever tag those scammers with red back in the days? do you know how many people you could've potentially save if you were to tag scammers?

[YuTü.Co.in]

Why didn't you ever tag those scammers with red back in the days?

I didn't want to be a victim of trust abuse by DT Minus 2[, 3, or 4] members!

[DarkStar_]

also DarkStar_ who tagged you for an unpaid loan, has also handed out a positive trust to Anduck for no valid reason.

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.
b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

(this was a few days ago)

[YuTü.Co.in]

also DarkStar_ who tagged you for an unpaid loan, has also handed out a positive trust to Anduck for no valid reason.

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.
b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

(this was a few days ago)

Thanks, bud. Full disclosure to the community, I didn't publicly or private request such course of action, nor have I ever contacted users concerning that red trust be deleted on any of my accounts. Nor have I ever solicited positive or neutral trust ratings.

The new owner of Leroy Fodor's account, cyberpinoy, did reach out to me in wanting red trust removed from said account, assuming I had placed such there which wasn't the case. He removed Leroy's red trust postings on my scammy ass' accounts more or less on his own accord.

[jackg]

also DarkStar_ who tagged you for an unpaid loan, has also handed out a positive trust to Anduck for no valid reason.

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.
b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

(this was a few days ago)

I'm hoping that wasn't just because digaran said to...

The removing of negative trust from the Gleb account was a good decision though.

[YuTü.Co.in]

also DarkStar_ who tagged you for an unpaid loan, has also handed out a positive trust to Anduck for no valid reason.

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.
b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

(this was a few days ago)

I'm hoping that wasn't just because digaran said to...

The removing of negative trust from the Gleb account was a good decision though.

It had nothing to do with digaran. Speakin' 'bout havin' nothin' to do with digaran ... 

[digaran]

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.

Why? you no longer want that loan to be paid? if so then removing the negative trust make sense, thanks for your generosity.

b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

You did the right thing, because you had no valid reason to hand out positive trust just because you wanted to, this is the right way to go in order to stay on DT2.

I didn't want to be a victim of trust abuse by DT Minus 2[, 3, or 4] members!

Well, bud that was a mistake, nothing is lost yet, would you consider tagging scammers and earn your position as a DT2 back? we could talk it over with some of the DT2 members who tagged you and after you could pay $600 to suchmoon you could get your account back and start tagging scammers this time.

[YuTü.Co.in]

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.

Why? you no longer want that loan to be paid? if so then removing the negative trust make sense, thanks for your generosity.

b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

You did the right thing, because you had no valid reason to hand out positive trust just because you wanted to, this is the right way to go in order to stay on DT2.

I didn't want to be a victim of trust abuse by DT Minus 2[, 3, or 4] members!

Well, bud that was a mistake, nothing is lost yet, would you consider tagging scammers and earn your position as a DT2 back? we could talk it over with some of the DT2 members who tagged you and after you could pay $600 to suchmoon you could get your account back and start tagging scammers this time.

Sounds like a plan. 

[DarkStar_]

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.

Why? you no longer want that loan to be paid? if so then removing the negative trust make sense, thanks for your generosity.

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

b) I deleted my positive trust from Anduck

You did the right thing, because you had no valid reason to hand out positive trust just because you wanted to, this is the right way to go in order to stay on DT2.

I removed it because I thought both sides of the argument were fair on having multiple counter ratings.

[pugman]

a) I deleted my negative trust from Gleb.

Why? you no longer want that loan to be paid? if so then removing the negative trust make sense, thanks for your generosity.

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Digaran's mind gonna be fucked up now.

[digaran]

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Could you please provide us with TXID and the name of the said individual?

[YuTü.Co.in]

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Could you please provide us with TXID and the name, home address and social security number of the said individual?

FTFY!

[DarkStar_]

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Could you please provide us with TXID and the name of the said individual?

If that individual wants to, they can. However, it is a private trade.

[jackg]

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Could you please provide us with TXID and the name, home address and social security number of the said individual?

Could you also provide your address, name and social security number Digaran?

[YuTü.Co.in]

Another individual purchased the debt from me.

Could you please provide us with TXID and the name, home address and social security number of the said individual?

Could you also provide your address, name and social security number Digaran?

I doubt he'll do it. With the exception of Josh Zerlan having his vitals revealed thanks to his disposition pertaining to BFL, I'm the ONLY person on this forum who has had ALL his true vitals revealed, thanks in part to ... wait for it ... Josh Zerlan. Ironically, in spite of working with the KC FBI in exposing BFL (blockchain forensics), I'm the ONLY person convicted of a crime pertaining to BFL unless you consider Sonny Vleisides' probation a conviction, of which he flagrantly violated, whereupon the judge ...

<insert pic of crickets here>

[YuTü.Co.in]

Glebs account now is controled by suchmoom (he bought it for $ 600 ) what for I don't know. another account called  YuTü.Co.in also was sold by Gleb and now is running another HYIP scam called YuTü.Coin. I guess it is controlled by Indian or Nigerian scammers. Just read their telegram channel. The guy who is masked under Bruno Kucinskas name is not Bruno. The language Bruno was speaking is completely different. And just study the project closely.... It is well masked HYIP/PONZI scam.

You, my friend, are a motherfuckin idiot. The YuTü.Co.in is 100% under my control. My phone number is, and always has been 702-981-5600. My other phone number is 815-508-1668, both 100% in my control unless, that is, your retard brain believes that I sold those numbers too to some Nigerian scammer running an HYIP. Call me, you cocksucker, and talk to me, Bruno Kucinskas, in person, else exit the gene pool, you useless piece of shit.

Full Disclosure: The above was penned in the voice of Bruno as much as possible, with later pennings echoing this voice morer betterer as we continue to analyze his penning style.

PS: You're a motherfuckin liar re claiming that you've read the over 10K posts of our Telegram channel, then concluded that I am not me. GO FUCK YOURSELF, YOU MOTHERFUCKIN COCKSUCKER !!!

Bruno

PSS: I'm PM'ing the link to this post so that you can reply in kind cuz that's the type of guy I'm.

[suchmoon]

Glebs account now is controled by suchmoom (he bought it for $ 600 ) what for I don't know.

Of course you don't know. This "suchmoom" dude doesn't exist, there was no account sale, and you should stick to Russian because you can't English, let alone judge others on their language.

[atenolol]

Cocksuker was your mother for sure, and you liked to watch how she was sucking some dicks for a few dollars? And your further used to fuck you up your latvian or lithuanian ass? Go and fuck your mother up her ass you dicksucker. She is gonna like it for sure.

[suchmoon]

Where are you from ? You don't like Russians ? Why ? What is your fucking mothers language ? Serbian or Horvat for sure.

You talking to me? I love Russians - in my experience they tend to be intelligent and honest people, except for a few shitheads like you. Every nation has its share of idiots. Speaking of which...

Cocksuker was your mother for sure, and you liked to watch how she was sucking some dicks for a few dollars? And your further used to fuck you up your latvian or lithuanian ass? Go and fuck your mother up her ass you dicksucker. She is gonna like it for sure.

Take it easy, don't go full potato.

[endlasuresh]

Glebs account now is controled by suchmoom (he bought it for $ 600 ) what for I don't know. another account called  YuTü.Co.in also was sold by Gleb and now is running another HYIP scam called YuTü.Coin. I guess it is controlled by Indian or Nigerian scammers. Just read their telegram channel. The guy who is masked under Bruno Kucinskas name is not Bruno. The language Bruno was speaking is completely different. And just study the project closely.... It is well masked HYIP/PONZI scam.

Please share more details so i can forward it to online Indian Police.

[InvoKing]

Every nation has its share of idiots. Speaking of which...

Take it easy, don't go full potato.

Aww the dude is beta block'd