What's more important to judge whether or not I should be trusted?

[suchmoon]

If I sent F&F first there is still risk in the transaction!
Since I need to claim unauthorized access in order to charge back if scammed and that easily results in account suspension if found out to be a lie.

Read first, be rude later.

You received the BTC. Where is the risk?

So I take it as a "yes" then. You would falsely claim a hack/unauthorized access to reverse a F&F transaction.

[1714851819]

1714851819

[1714851819]

1714851819

[1714851819]

1714851819

[OgNasty]

So I take it as a "yes" then. You would falsely claim a hack/unauthorized access to reverse a F&F transaction.

Statements like this don't support your case that your judgement should be relied upon by others.

[iluvbitcoins]

I've been slandering?

And you've just claimed I blackmailed you HAHAH

I've just posted all the 3 PMs I've sent you.

Let's let the users decide for themselves whether or not that's blackmail.

1.http://prntscr.com/laujf6
This is the simmilar english equivalent I've sent to The Pharmacist.
http://prntscr.com/laukmw
2.http://prntscr.com/laul0v
3.http://prntscr.com/laulccf

If I sent F&F first there is still risk in the transaction!
Since I need to claim unauthorized access in order to charge back if scammed and that easily results in account suspension if found out to be a lie.

Read first, be rude later.

You received the BTC. Where is the risk?

So I take it as a "yes" then. You would falsely claim a hack/unauthorized access to reverse a F&F transaction.

You just said I was sending bitcoins, how am I receiving them?
Can you first have a talk with yourself in order to decide what you want to say?

Now you're starting to annoy me.
It is an explanation on why there's 'risk' in that transaction and you know it yourself!
If I wrote there isnt' any risk for the sender in an  I&S transaction because you can charge it back, would that mean I would falsely claim I haven't received an item?

You're hilarious.
Why are you trying so hard to paint me as an immoral man?

[suchmoon]

So I take it as a "yes" then. You would falsely claim a hack/unauthorized access to reverse a F&F transaction.

Statements like this don't support your case that your judgement should be relied upon by others.

What's your interpretation then:

I need to claim unauthorized access in order to charge back if scammed and that easily results in account suspension if found out to be a lie

What plausible reason is there to claim unauthorized access if there wasn't any unauthorized access?

You just said I was sending bitcoins, how am I receiving them?
What the hell are you on about?

Now you're starting to annoy me.
It is an explanation on why there's 'risk' in that transaction and you know it yourself!
If I wrote there isnt' any risk for the sender in an  I&S transaction because you can charge it back, would that mean I would falsely claim I haven't received an item?

You're hilarious.
Why are you trying so hard to paint me as an immoral man?

I never said anything about you sending bitcoins. I'm talking about your trust ratings that you left for others where they sent bitcoins to you and you sent PayPal payments. You're receiving bitcoins therefore you don't have any risk in the transaction and you shouldn't hand out positive trust for that.

A chargeback of an I&S transaction would not be false if you indeed didn't received the item. It could still be a problem if you were engaged in a trade that is against PayPal policy or not covered by buyer protection, which most likely applies to bitcoins.

A false claim of unauthorized access in an F&F transaction is not a "risk", it's fraud.

[Lauda]

I've been slandering?

And you've just claimed I blackmailed you HAHAH
-snip-

Correct. First (failed) blackmail/coercion, then slander and now you've started turning the debacle into harassment given your recent lie on my trust page.

You have not only abused the trust system but also mismanaged 3000 BTC.

Which is an objective lie, as it isn't mathematically possible[1].

Quite simple. QED.

A false claim of unauthorized access in an F&F transaction is not a "risk", it's fraud.

Quite the risk.  

[OgNasty]

So I take it as a "yes" then. You would falsely claim a hack/unauthorized access to reverse a F&F transaction.

Statements like this don't support your case that your judgement should be relied upon by others.

What's your interpretation then:

I need to claim unauthorized access in order to charge back if scammed and that easily results in account suspension if found out to be a lie

What plausible reason there is to claim unauthorized access if there wasn't any unauthorized access?

I believe any sane person without an axe to grind against this user would interpret that statement as...

If the user were to not send the BTC as promised after I sent the PayPal funds, I would have to lie and claim my account was hacked by someone and the PayPal transfer sent maliciously in order to have my funds returned.  This could open me up to potentially having my PayPal account suspended and damaging my ability to conduct business.  Therefore I did trust the user to a certain extent and gave them the ability to potentially harm my business.

[iluvbitcoins]

You guys just made my point by grasping straws in order to paint me in a negative light!!

In order to reverse an F&F transaction I'd need to claim unauthorized access!

If I've sent an F&F transaction and I don't receive BTC, I've been scammed!

You've just proven there's risk in that transaction and completely annihilated your own point!!

Hahah

The other person takes the risk and may decide to leave a positive rating for you.

A false claim of unauthorized access in an F&F transaction is not a "risk", it's fraud.

[suchmoon]

I believe any sane person without an axe to grind against this user would interpret that statement as...

If the user were to not send the BTC as promised after I sent the PayPal funds, I would have to lie and claim my account was hacked by someone and the PayPal transfer sent maliciously in order to have my funds returned.  This could open me up to potentially having my PayPal account suspended and damaging my ability to conduct business.  Therefore I did trust the user to a certain extent and gave them the ability to potentially harm my business.

That sounds like a stretch.

If PayPal is legitimately reversible, then there was no risk for iluvbitcoins in the transaction and the positive ratings should not have been posted. That was my original suggestion to iluvbitcoins - to remove those ratings.

If PayPal is not legitimately reversible (F&F) then iluvbitcoins appears to be saying that they would defraud PayPal in order to get their money back. Describing it as a risk is like saying that I risk robbing a bank if someone scams me on Bitcointalk.

In order to reverse an F&F transaction I'd need to claim unauthorized access!

Have you ever done this?

If I've sent an F&F transaction and I don't receive BTC, I've been scammed!

If you sent first - yes, but that has nothing to do with PayPal. Why would you defraud PayPal to get your money back?

[iluvbitcoins]

Then there was no risk for iluvbitcoins in the transaction and the positive ratings should not have been posted.

Unless I don't want to claim unauthorized acces when it didn't happen?

Have you ever done this?

No

If you sent first - yes, but that has nothing to do with PayPal. Why would you defraud PayPal to get your money back?

I wouldn't. That's why there's risk involved.

[OgNasty]

Describing it as a risk is like saying that I risk robbing a bank if someone scams me on Bitcointalk.

PayPal doesn't allow cryptocurrency trades, so in order to have the funds returned, he would have had to lie even though his claim is legitimate, exposing him to potential action from PayPal.  How would you describe taking money from a bank against their policies?

[suchmoon]

I wouldn't. That's why there's risk involved.

Ok. Why would you even bring it up then? The risk is you sending first, which isn't entirely clear from your trust ratings because you didn't post references. So is this correct then?

• All your PayPal trades where you sent PP and left positive trust were F&F.
• You went first in all your PayPal trades where you sent PP and left positive trust.

PayPal doesn't allow cryptocurrency trades, so in order to have the funds returned, he would have had to lie even though his claim is legitimate, exposing him to potential action from PayPal.  How would you describe taking money from a bank against their policies?

There is no legitimate claim against F&F if the transaction was knowingly initiated by the sender. There is also no legitimate claim if the transaction was against the policy to begin with. Fraud is fraud, whether it's PayPal or a bank.

Now that iluvbitcoins finally explicitly stated they would not engage in fraud I'm gonna have to take their word for it.

[iluvbitcoins]

I wouldn't. That's why there's risk involved.

Ok. Why would you even bring it up then?

Because you said there's no risk in it.

The risk is you sending first, which isn't entirely clear from your trust ratings because you didn't post references. So is this correct then?

• All your PayPal trades where you sent PP and left positive trust were F&F.
• You went first in all your PayPal trades where you sent PP and left positive trust.

I would say most of them were F&F, I can't be 100% sure for deals that happened a couple years back, so I'm going to revise the deals tommorow morning (already did some today).
Not in all of them but in the older ones certainly (since I was a trustless newbie).

Now that iluvbitcoins finally explicitly stated they would not engage in fraud I'm gonna have to take their word for it.

So, I've escrowed a million $ in an anonymous cryptocurrency but you had to have me say I wouldn't engage in PayPal fraud before you could trust me?  

[suchmoon]

So, I've escrowed a million $ in an anonymous cryptocurrency but you had to have me say I wouldn't engage in PayPal fraud before you could trust me?  

No, that's not what I said at all. I don't trust your ratings and I have no particular opinion on your trustworthiness in a trade. The PayPal thing is just a distraction arising from your peculiar way of defining "risk" and using "chargeback" in the context of F&F.

[marlboroza]

https://prnt.sc/laul0v

What is keeping you from tagging it? We don't want to see another scammer running around the forum with old bought account trying to scam someone.
Other than this I really don't want to comment anything.

[iluvbitcoins]

https://prnt.sc/laul0v

What is keeping you from tagging it? We don't want to see another scammer running around the forum with old bought account trying to scam someone.
Other than this I really don't want to comment anything.

How can we see another scammer around the forum with an old bought account if the account was never sold?

[marlboroza]

How can we see another scammer around the forum with an old bought account if the account was never sold?

How can we see that you didn't sell it?
Do you think TP is not abusing trust system?

[iluvbitcoins]

How can we see another scammer around the forum with an old bought account if the account was never sold?

How can we see that you didn't sell it?
Do you think TP is not abusing trust system?

A friend of mine is using it currently.
I can show it to a trusted individual in private.

I thought he is, but I have removed my feedback since he apologized and his other feedback doesn't have anything that could show he would do something malicious.

[LoyceV]

A friend of mine is using it currently.
I can show it to a trusted individual in private.

How many Merits did he earn per post? That's a reasonable indicator to judge if he's spamming or contributing. For comparison: you've received 0.0722 Merit per new post.

Shouldn't this thread be moved to Reputation by now?

[cschy01]

@The Pharmacist, I appreciate for your step to remove red tag from account seller. Do you like to consider remove tag for account buyer ? I accept my mistake that I had attempt to buy account. Since this is allowed by rules that is why I had tried to buy. I am telling truth, I didn't want to by for scam or any other abuse. Honestly I want only participant bounty campaign. Some manager do not accept Jr. Member. That is why I attempt to buy. I have small job and I am too much busy, so I do not have too much time to build account by earning merit. Trust me, I didn't buy  account and I will not try anymore. Just give me one chance. Thank you advanced.

[marlboroza]

I thought he is, but I have removed my feedback since he apologized and his other feedback doesn't have anything that could show he would do something malicious.

Ok, he made apology and *puf* - he is not abusing trust system any more.  

Wow, 3 votes against in like 10 minutes.
Seems like Lauda used some multies  

Right...I can literally say this for you - iluvbitcoins, shibawow, account from 2012...sorry, not correct order of accounts  
Welcome to DT, btw. I am out of this thread.